The Supreme Court has appointed Senior Advocate Shoeb Alam as amicus curiae in a batch of appeals that challenge a Kerala High Court judgment recognising a Muslim woman’s right to dissolve her marriage through khula without her husband’s consent.
A Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran directed that the matter be listed for hearing on April 22, 2026. The Court noted that the case raises an important question of Muslim personal law and sought assistance from Senior Advocate Shoeb Alam.
The Bench recorded:
“List for hearing in the list of regular hearing matters on 22.04.2026. We request Mr. Shoeb Alam, learned senior counsel, to assist this Court in this matter, as it involves a question of Muslim personal law.”
Challenge to Kerala High Court Judgment
The appeals arise from a decision of a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court, comprising Justices A. Muhamed Mustaque and C. S. Dias.
The High Court held that under Islamic law, a Muslim woman can terminate her marriage by invoking khula. It ruled that this right does not depend on the husband’s consent.
The impugned judgment dismissed a review petition filed against the Bench’s earlier decision. In that earlier ruling, the High Court affirmed that a Muslim woman may invoke khula even if the husband withholds concurrence.
In the review judgment, the Court observed that India lacks a statutory or institutional mechanism to formally recognise termination of marriage at the instance of the wife when the husband refuses consent. Therefore, courts can acknowledge khula without requiring the husband’s approval.
High Court’s Observations on the Review Petition
At the outset of its review judgment, the High Court made strong remarks about the nature of the challenge.
It stated that the review petition reflected a perspective that treated Muslim women as subordinate to male authority. The Court further observed that the petition did not appear innocuous. Instead, it seemed influenced by sections of the clergy and what it described as hegemonic masculinity within the Muslim community.
The review petition challenged a divorce decree granted to a Muslim wife under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939.
Nature and Requirements of Khula
In its earlier judgment, the High Court clarified that a Muslim wife’s right to terminate marriage flows from the Holy Quran. This right does not depend on the husband’s acceptance.
The Court explained that khula functions as a form of divorce analogous to talaq, which is available to the husband.
It also laid down conditions for a valid khula:
- The wife must declare repudiation or termination of the marriage
- She must offer to return the dower or any material benefit received during the marriage
- An effective attempt at reconciliation must precede the declaration
Rejection of Argument Requiring Husband’s Talaq
During review proceedings, counsel argued that a Muslim wife must first demand talaq from her husband. If he refuses, she must approach a qazi or court.
The High Court rejected this submission.
It reasoned that Islamic law recognises a woman’s right to seek termination. Moreover, if the husband refuses, a court would merely pronounce termination rather than adjudicate a dispute.
The Bench emphasised that courts in India are not guardians of adult and competent women. It also declined to accept the argument that a Muslim woman lacks an absolute right to invoke khula.
Additionally, while acknowledging that views of Islamic clergy on belief and practice may merit deference, the Court stated that judges cannot rely on clergy lacking formal legal training to determine questions of Muslim personal law.
Matter Before the Supreme Court
The case is now pending before the Supreme Court in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) Nos. 8936–8937 of 2024, titled X v. Y.
The Court will examine the legal position on April 22, 2026, after receiving assistance from the appointed amicus curiae.
