• Family courts cannot treat cruelty-based suits as simple Khula cases, extinguish unpaid deferred dower, Justice Kayani rules
• Urges fresh legislation to protect Haq Mehr rights after legal uncertainty created by FSC’s 2022 ruling
LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) has ruled that a wife’s right to her dower (Haq Mehr) remains protected if a marriage is dissolved due to the husband’s cruelty or misconduct, even if the family court formally labels the decree as Khula.
Dismissing a petition filed by a husband, Arslan, challenging a family court’s decision that awarded 50 per cent of the deferred dower to his ex-wife, Nisha Shahid, Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani issued guidelines aimed at ending the automatic forfeiture of dower in marital dissolution cases.
The couple married on March 18, 2022, with a deferred dower of Rs100,000.
Shortly after the marriage, the wife filed a suit for dissolution, alleging that her husband subjected her to physical and verbal abuse when she demanded payment of the dower.
She further alleged that her husband remained unemployed, engaged in theft and substance abuse, and forcibly turned her out of the matrimonial home.
A Toba Tek Singh judge dissolved the marriage and awarded 50 per cent of the deferred dower to the wife under Section 10(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1964.
The husband challenged the award, arguing that after the Federal Shariat Court (FSC) struck down sub-sections (5) and (6) of Section 10 of the Family Courts Act in 2022, family courts no longer had the authority to grant any portion of the dower upon dissolution of a marriage.
However, Justice Kayani rejected the husband’s contention, clarifying the crucial legal distinction between a divorce sought solely on the basis of a wife’s personal aversion (Khula simpliciter) and a dissolution resulting from the husband’s misconduct (nashuz).
The judge held that under Sections 2 and 5 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, a wife’s right to dower remains intact and cannot be reduced or forfeited if she proves grounds such as physical, psychological, verbal or economic abuse.
“A wife’s credible testimony does not require medical certificates or police reports to be acted upon by a family court,” he ruled. Justice Kayani held that family courts cannot convert cruelty-based dissolution suits into simple Khula decrees without the wife’s informed consent and that unpaid deferred dower constitutes a debt owed by the husband and cannot be extinguished under the guise of Khula.
“Dower is a proprietary right arising from the contract of marriage... It cannot be forfeited, reduced or apportioned without a specific finding that the law permits it,” Justice Kayani ruled.
The judge further observed that the right to dissolve a marriage and the right to dower are separate legal rights.
“A decree of dissolution does not by itself decide the fate of the dower, which requires an independent finding based on its own evidence,” he added.
Justice Kayani noted that much of the confusion among trial courts arose after the FSC struck down sub-sections (5) and (6) of Section 10 without any replacement legislative framework, leading many family courts to mistakenly deny women their dower as a matter of course.
The judge called for fresh legislation requiring family courts to determine the cause of dissolution before deciding dower, while making it clear that a wife’s entitlement remains protected where grounds under Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act are proved.
Published in Dawn, July 21st, 2026
