Pakistan Case Law
1970 SCMR 845

ABDUL MANNA N vs SAFURAN NESSA

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1970 SCMR 845
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Revision No. 203 of 1970 Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No.
Date1970-06-18
Judge(s)Hamoodur Rahman, C. J. and M. R. Khan
Authored byM. R. Khan
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

The petitioner challenged an order of the High Court of East Pakistan which had dismissed his criminal revision against a magistrate's order granting maintenance to his wife and child under section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The core legal question was whether an alleged divorce claimed by the petitioner was legally effective to terminate the marriage and relieve him of maintenance obligations when mandatory notice had not been given to the Chairman. The Supreme Court held that in the absence of a notice given to the Chairman of the Local Union Council under section 7(1) of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961, the divorce had not become effective pursuant to subsection (3) of section 7. The Court laid down the principle that a divorce remains ineffective until the statutory requirement of notice under section 7 of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 is fulfilled. The petition for special leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does an alleged divorce become effective without giving notice to the Chairman under section 7 of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961?
  • Is a husband liable to pay maintenance under section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when the marriage has not been legally dissolved through effective divorce?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 488, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
  • Section 7(1), Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961
  • Section 7(3), Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961
maintenancedivorceMuslim Family Laws OrdinanceCode of Criminal Procedurenotice to chairman

1. M. R. KHAN, J.-The petitioner married the respondent and got a child by that marriage. The respondent made an application under section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for her maintenance and the maintenance of the child. Mr. S. M. Hossain, Magistrate of the First Class, Narayanganj allowed a monthly maintenance of Rs. 40 to the respondent and a further monthly maintenance of Rs. 20 for the child. This order granting maintenance was challenged by the petitioner in Criminal Revision No. 203 of 1970. A learned Single Judge of the High Court of East Pakistan dismissed the criminal revision. The petition for special leave is directed against the order of the High Court.

2. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner's marriage with the respondent was dissolved by divorce and that this dissolution was effected with the consent of the respondent. This plea was also raised before the learned Judge of the High Court, but he found that no notice of the alleged divorce having been given to the Chairman of the Local Union Council under section 7(1) of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, the divorce had not become effective. The learned counsel for the petitioner concedes that no notice of the alleged divorce was given to the Chairman as required by section 7(1) of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance. That being so the alleged divorce, in view of the express provision of subsection (3) of section 7 of the said Ordinance, is yet to become effective. Thus, the view taken by the learned Judge is correct. Accordingly no interference with the order of the High Court is called for. The petition is dismissed: The delay in filing the petition is condoned on the grounds stated in the application for condonation of delay.

Cited by 18 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.