The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court has clarified that the provisions of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 apply only to Talaq-e-Biddat (instant triple talaq) and not to Talaq-e-Ahsan, which is a valid form of divorce under Muslim personal law. Accordingly, the Court quashed an FIR and related criminal proceedings initiated against a Muslim man and his parents under Section 4 of the said Act.
The decision came in Criminal Application No. 2559 of 2024, filed by Tanveer Ahmed and his parents, seeking to quash FIR No. 124 of 2024 registered with Bhusawal Bazar Peth Police Station, Jalgaon District, and proceedings in Regular Criminal Case No. 1156 of 2024 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhusawal. The FIR alleged commission of offences under Section 4 of the Muslim Women Act and Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Division Bench comprising Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice Sanjay A. Deshmukh noted that Tanveer Ahmed had pronounced Talaq-e-Ahsan — a single pronouncement of talaq followed by a 90-day period of abstinence — and that this form of talaq is not punishable under the 2019 Act.
Court’s Observations and Legal Reasoning
Referring to Section 2(c) of the Muslim Women Act, the Court emphasized that the Act defines “talaq” as Talaq-e-Biddat or any similar form that results in instantaneous and irrevocable divorce. The Court observed:
“All other forms of Talaq were not prohibited or barred. What was declared unconstitutional in Shayara Bano vs Union of India was Talaq-e-Biddat, and not Talaq-e-Ahsan.”
The Bench further referred to the 1981 Supreme Court ruling in Zohara Khatoon v. Mohd. Ibrahim and a coordinate Bench decision in Shaikh Taslim Shaikh Hakim v. State of Maharashtra (2022), which recognized Talaq-e-Ahsan as a valid and lawful mode of dissolution of marriage.
The High Court also cited the Kerala High Court’s ruling in Jahfer Sadiq E.A. v. Marwa and Ors (2022), where Talaq-e-Ahsan and Talaq-e-Hasan were upheld as constitutionally valid forms of divorce.
Abuse of Process
The Court noted that the FIR did not include any allegation under Section 498-A IPC or other penal provisions and was solely based on the pronouncement of Talaq-e-Ahsan. It also held that the inclusion of the petitioner’s parents (in-laws of the complainant) was unwarranted, as Section 4 of the Act is applicable only to Muslim husbands. The Court stated:
“There cannot be a common intention of pronouncement of Talaq. Therefore, even at this stage also, we can say that it would be an abuse of process of law if the matter is asked to be proceeded for the offence punishable under Section 4 of the said Act against the father-in-law and mother-in-law.”
Final Order
Holding that continuing the proceedings would amount to misuse of the law, the Court allowed the application and passed the following order:
“The FIR vide Crime No.124 of 2024 dated 15.04.2024 registered with Bhusawal Bazar Peth Police Station, District Jalgaon as well as the proceedings in Regular Criminal Case No.1156 of 2024… stand quashed and set aside as against the present applicants.”
Citation: Tanveer Ahmed and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra, Criminal Application No. 2559 of 2024
