All talaq forms remain ineffective for 90 days, says SC as it upholds wife’s revocation

The Supreme Court has upheld a judgment of the Sindh High Court that validated the withdrawal of a notice of divorce issued by a wife acting under delegated powers and reiterated that no form of talaq – whether pronounced by a husband or exercised through delegation – acquires legal effect until the mandatory 90-day period under section 7 of the Muslim Family Code, 19, 19, has lap.

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi dismissed the appeal filed by Muhammad Hassan Sultan, who had challenged two orders issued by the Union/Arbitration Board in Karachi. The controversy stemmed from a notice of divorce issued by his wife on July 3, 2023, which she withdrew on August 10 – well within the statutory timeline – prompting the council president to close the case the following day.

Read: SC pushes for reforms to stop custodial killings

The court noted that the statutory framework leaves no ambiguity: Section 7 applies to “all forms of talaq regardless of form” and the law does not distinguish between talaq-e-biddat, talaq-e-ahsan or divorce exercised through delegated authority.

Citing earlier precedents, the bench reaffirmed that “no form of talaq is effective before the expiry of ninety days from the date on which written notice is given to the President,” adding that the effect of Section 7 is “mandatory”, allowing revocation during the voting window.

Central to the case was the delegation clause in the couple’s marriage contract. The bench noted that there was no dispute that the petitioner delegated this right without placing any limitation or condition on it and in fact specifically stated that it was delegated ‘unconditionally’. As a result, the Court held that the respondent wife was “standing in the husband’s shoes” and therefore had the same authority to withdraw the notice before the statutory period expired.

Petitioner sought to argue that custody cases in New York reflected mala fide intent. The court dismissed the claim, noting that foreign legal proceedings had no bearing on the legality of the recall under Pakistani law. It agreed with the high court’s approach and emphasized that the only decisive question was whether the withdrawal occurred within ninety days.

Also read: Afghan regime poses threat to region, world: DG ISPR

The Supreme Court also upheld another impugned order dated January 3, 2024, which related to another notification issued by the petitioner. The bench found that the chairman acted correctly under the governing rules, including SRO 1086(K)/61, which confers jurisdiction on Pakistan’s diplomatic missions when a party is resident abroad.

Regarding the statutory scheme, the Court cautioned against interpretations that would dilute § 8, noting that such readings “would defeat the purpose of § 8, which is to give statutory recognition to the delegation of the right to divorce to a wife and to impose on that right the same conditions as on a husband’s right to divorce under section 7.”

Concluding the case, the court ruled that the High Court judgment had “no legal invalidity” and dismissed the petition after converting it into an appeal.