Pakistan’s Supreme Court has ruled that contracting a second marriage without the consent of the first wife and approval from the Arbitration Council is a clear violation of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, exposing the husband to both criminal and civil consequences.
In a five-page written judgment authored by Justice Musarrat Hilali, the apex court set aside earlier rulings of the Family Court and the Peshawar High Court in the Naila Javed case, and directed the husband to pay Rs1.2 million in dower (haq mehr) to the woman.
The court held that under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, a woman has the legal right to seek dissolution of marriage if her husband contracts another marriage without her consent. It further clarified that marrying again without prior approval from the Arbitration Council is a direct breach of Section 6 of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance.
According to the judgment, the husband in this case neither obtained written permission from his first wife nor sought approval from the Arbitration Council—facts he himself admitted during the proceedings. The court also declared that the act of contracting a second marriage during the pendency of the case constituted an additional legal violation.
The Supreme Court emphasized that courts cannot convert a woman’s plea for divorce into a decree of khula without recording her statement and explicit consent. Referring to its earlier precedents, the court reiterated that khula can only be granted with the clear and voluntary willingness of the woman.
The judgment noted that Naila Javed had sought dissolution of marriage on grounds of cruelty and legal violations, but the Family Court dissolved the marriage on the basis of khula instead, ordering her to forgo her dower despite the fact that she had never requested khula.
The court further observed that non-payment of maintenance, character assassination during cross-examination, and contracting a second marriage without lawful permission all fall within the legal definition of cruelty. In such circumstances, it ruled, a woman’s refusal to live with her husband cannot be termed disobedience.
Reaffirming the legal position, the Supreme Court stated that a husband who contracts a second marriage without the first wife’s consent and Arbitration Council approval will face legal consequences, while the affected woman retains full rights to seek dissolution of marriage and recover her financial entitlements.
