ISLAMABAD: The Federal Shariat Court (FSC) on Monday dismissed a petition seeking a decree against the marriage of Prime Minister Imran Khan on the basis of 10 questions related to Islamic laws and constitutional provisions.

A three-member FSC bench comprising Chief Justice Mohammad Noor Meskanzai, Justice Dr Syed Moham­mad Anwer and Justice Khadim Hus­sain M. Shaikh declared the petition as non-maintainable with an observation that the petition was “not filed in accordance with the Federal Shariat Court (Procedure) Rules 1981”.

The court order also mentioned the 10 questions asked by the petitioner, including “whether Holy Quran empowers wife to seek dissolution of marriage from her husband, whether the Muslim wife who is a mother of children can seek Khula from her husband for a second marriage, whether Holy Quran acknowledges her as mother of leftover children, and whether Nikkah after Khula is in accordance with the constitutional provisions”.

Shariat court terms petitioner’s questions ‘absurd, derogatory and absolutely irrelevant’

The court noted that the petitioner cited only one verse of Surah Taha to support his contention. “This verse has no link whatsoever with the dissolution of marriage on the basis of Khula”, which was supposed to be the main issue highlighted in the petition, the court observed.

Regarding the questionnaire, the bench was of the opinion that they were contrary to the prevalent procedure and even otherwise most of the questions were irrelevant and got nothing to do with FSC business.

Some questions were “absurd, derogatory and absolutely irrelevant”, while two questions that were related to Nikkah were “ambiguous, inconceivable and not understandable, rather [they] were not supposed to be framed at all,” the court remarked.

The bench, however, was of the opinion that in order to seek any relief, “the petitioner may file a separate petition by challenging the corresponding provisions incorporated in Nikkahnama if so advised”.

In its order, the court stated that the petitioner was required to have shown either collectively or individually any corresponding law or provision of the law enacted and enforced that ran contrary to the injunctions of Holy Quran or Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him).

Regarding Section 10 of the Family Courts Act related to Khula, the bench ob­­s­erved that this had already been decided by the court and “is a past and closed chapter”. However, it suggested: “The petitioner may become party in the appeal pending before the Shariat Appellate Bench of Supreme Court, if so advised.”

The order stated that the petitioner had “not specified any specific provision of law being repugnant to the injunctions of Quran and Sunnah as required by the Constitution, as elaborated in the Federal Shariat Court (Procedure) Rules, 1981. Subse­quen­t­­ly, it dismissed the petition declaring it as non-maintainable”.

Published in Dawn, February 8th, 2022

Opinion

Editorial

‘Draconian’ law
06 Oct, 2022

‘Draconian’ law

THE debate over what it means to be ‘sadiq’ and ‘ameen’ has reignited after the incumbent Supreme Court ...
Welcome clarity
Updated 06 Oct, 2022

Welcome clarity

There needs to be consensus amongst all political actors that matters of governance should be the exclusive domain of civilians.
Car purchases
06 Oct, 2022

Car purchases

IF we are in the market to buy a new car, we end up paying a significantly large amount as premium over the sticker...
More than economics
Updated 05 Oct, 2022

More than economics

Ishaq Dar’s appointment is but a sign of the paradigm shift in economic policymaking.
Dens of corruption
05 Oct, 2022

Dens of corruption

MOST prisons in Pakistan are a microcosm of the inequitable and exploitative world outside their walls. A probe by...
Football tragedy
05 Oct, 2022

Football tragedy

SPORTS arouses the rawest of human emotions. Football is no exception — in fact, the passions on display at...