The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that a Muslim male cannot seek a decree for declaration of divorce from a Family Court on the basis of a Fatwa issued by a religious seminary, as such a seminary has no legal authority to grant a divorce. However, Justice Vivek Jain reiterated that Muslim men have full legal entitlement to file a petition directly before the Family Court seeking dissolution of marriage under the law. Allowing a civil revision petition filed by the wife, the High Court rejected the husband’s suit under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) for lacking a valid cause of action, while granting him liberty to institute a fresh divorce petition in accordance with law.
Background of the Case
The civil revision petition was filed by the wife challenging an order dated April 11, 2026, passed by the Family Court. The Family Court had rejected her application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC, in which she had sought the rejection of a suit filed by her husband.
The husband had instituted the suit before the Family Court seeking a declaration of divorce on the ground that a Fatwa had been issued by the Darul-Ifta Masajid Committee, Bhopal, on October 22, 2024 (also referred to in the plaint as October 29, 2024).
Arguments of the Parties
Senior Advocate Imtiaz Husain, appearing alongside Advocate Ms. Afshan Ahmad for the petitioner-wife, argued that the Darul-Ifta Masajid Committee, Bhopal, holds no authority to grant a divorce, and therefore no decree of declaration can be issued based on its Fatwa. It was submitted that the Fatwa merely cited Islamic texts regarding circumstances under which divorce may be sought and did not constitute an actual divorce granted by the seminary.
Conversely, Advocate Sankalp Kochar, appearing with Advocate Pramendra Singh Thakur for the respondent-husband, contended that the suit was maintainable, the prayer for declaration of divorce was validly made, and a petition for divorce is otherwise maintainable under law.
The High Court noted that while the wife’s original application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC before the trial court claimed that the suit was filed under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, where only females have a right to seek divorce, a different argument regarding the non-maintainability of a suit for declaration of divorce was raised during the revision hearing.
Court’s Analysis
Upon examining the plaint and the Fatwa, the High Court observed that the Fatwa nowhere mentions divorce to be granted and that a seminary cannot grant a divorce to a Muslim male. The Court noted, “The said Fatwa only mentions the provisions in the Islamic scriptures which give guidance in such situation when there is cruel conduct of the wife which was queried by the present applicant to the Darul-dafa Masajid Committee, Bhopal.”
Addressing the maintainability of divorce petitions by Muslim men in Family Courts, the Court observed that the issue is no longer res integra. Referring to a Division Bench precedent of the High Court in F.A. No. 1199 of 2022, which interpreted Section 7(1)(Explanation)(d) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, and Rule 9(2)(vii) of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Family Court Rules, 1988, the Court highlighted that the Family Courts Act applies to all communities without distinction.
The Court quoted the Division Bench’s findings: “Since this provision does not distinguish on the basis of Caste and Community, therefore, it is all pervasive in nature.”
The Court further cited from the Division Bench ruling: “Therefore, the procedure established by law is clear that a Muslim male can sue a suit or proceeding for dissolution of marriage on the grounds as available to him.”
The Court also referenced earlier decisions discussed in that judgment, including Aqeel Ahmed (Khan) Vs. Smt. Farzana Khatun (First Appeal No. 1017 of 2022) and the Madras High Court judgment in Settu Vs. Reshma Sulthana (C.M.A. No. 2192 of 2017).
Highlighting constitutional rights, the Court reproduced the Division Bench’s observation: “Even the Constitutional Morality and its Spirit also mandates that no person can be rendered remediless. If the reasoning of trial Court would have been accepted then a muslim male would have been denied the valuable right to access justice or judicial forum to ventilate his grievances. This could never have been the Constitutional spirit, morality and Constitutional Vision of Justice.”
Decision of the Court
The High Court observed that the husband appeared to have filed the suit for declaration under the misconception that a direct petition seeking divorce was not maintainable. Clarifying that a suit seeking divorce is indeed maintainable, the Court held that no decree for declaration of divorce can be granted on the strength of a Fatwa.
The Court concluded: “Therefore, the suit seeking declaration of divorce does not reveal any valid or legal cause of action and therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, the plaint deserves to be rejected by exercising powers under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.”
Allowing the civil revision, the Court set aside the Family Court’s order and rejected the husband’s plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. However, the Court clarified that its order would not affect the right of the husband to institute a fresh divorce petition before the Family Court in accordance with law.
Case Title: Dr. Shaziya Nawaz Khan v. Syed Sami Ali
Case No.: Civil Revision No. 503 of 2026
Bench: Justice Vivek Jain
Date: August 3, 2026
