The Patna High Court has held that no specific reason for divorce is necessary for a Muslim husband to dissolve his marriage, while dismissing an appeal filed by a husband against the Family Court’s refusal to grant him a divorce decree.

A Division Bench of Justice Bibek Chaudhuri and Justice Rana Vikram Singh made the observation while deciding a petition filed by Md Sarif Anwar @ Shareef Anwar against his wife Noorjahan Khatoon @ Noorjahan Khatun. The judgment was delivered on August 31, 2026.

Husband relied on successive Talaq pronouncements

The parties were married on April 7, 1999, according to Muslim rites and rituals. According to the husband, his wife started treating him with cruelty and permanently left the matrimonial home on October 14, 2008.

He claimed that despite his attempts to bring her back, she refused and wanted the marriage to be dissolved.

The husband subsequently claimed to have divorced her through successive pronouncements of Talaq and filed a case seeking a decree of divorce. The wife did not appear despite service of summons and the Family Court proceeded ex parte.

The evidence also indicated that the wife was residing in Bangalore after marrying another person, while the husband had also contracted a second marriage after the pronouncement of Talaq.

Family Court relies on ‘Shayara Bano’

The Family Court considered the Supreme Court’s judgment in Shayara Bano v. Union of India, reported in (2017) 9 SCC 2, under which the practice of divorce by Triple Talaq was declared unconstitutional.

The Family Court consequently held that the husband had not divorced his wife in accordance with the law and dismissed his divorce case.

In his challenge before the High Court, the husband argued that his wife had deserted him since 2008 and that he had instituted the divorce proceedings in 2021, after more than 13 years. He also relied upon the grounds of cruelty and desertion.

No specific reason necessary for Muslim husband for Divorce

The High Court examined the principles set out in Mulla's Principles of Mahomedan Law (19th Edition, reprint 2021).

The Court noted that, according to Mulla, a marriage under Muslim law may be dissolved by the husband "at his will" without intervention of a court, by mutual consent, or by a judicial decree.

It further noted that no specific reason for divorce is necessary for dissolution of marriage by the husband, which can be effected by oral pronouncement of Talaq or through a written Talaknama.

The Bench categorically observed: "Therefore, in order to dissolve a marriage by Mahomedan Male, no ground of divorce is necessary."

Successive Talaq pronouncements cannot be irrevocable

The Court then considered the different forms of Talaq, Talak ahsan, Talak hasan and Talak-ul-bidaat or Talak-i-badai, the latter involving three successive pronouncements of Talaq.

The Bench noted that Talaq-i-bidaat had been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Shayara Bano. Importantly, the Court found that the husband had not claimed that his divorce was effected through Talak ahsan or Talak hasan. His case was based on successive pronouncements of Talaq.

The Court therefore held: "Therefore, declaration of divorce by successive pronouncement of Talak cannot be held to be irrevocable."

The Bench also noted that Talak ahsan becomes irrevocable and complete upon expiry of Iddat, while Talak hasan becomes irrevocable and complete upon the third pronouncement irrespective of Iddat.

Cruelty, Desertion argument rejected

The High Court also rejected the husband’s contention that he could dissolve the marriage through a decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty or desertion.

The Court observed: "The learned Advocate for the appellant is absolutely misconceived that the husband/appellant can dissolve the marriage by a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty or desertion."

The Court ultimately found no illegality in the Family Court’s order and dismissed the appeal.

Case Title : Md Sarif Anwar v. Noorjahan Khatoon

Date of Order: August 31, 2026

Bench: Justice Bibek Chaudhuri and Justice Rana Vikram Singh

Tags: