ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has issued a landmark judgment on khula and domestic disputes, declaring that a divorce through khula cannot be granted without the clear, informed, and unambiguous consent of the wife. The ruling is being viewed as a major development in Pakistan family law and women’s rights protection.
The detailed 12-page verdict was issued by a three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi, while Justice Shahid Bilal Hassan authored the judgment. The Supreme Court ruling highlighted the importance of safeguarding the legal and financial rights of women involved in family disputes.
According to the judgment, courts cannot convert allegations of cruelty into khula proceedings without obtaining the wife’s consent. The bench observed that doing so could negatively impact a woman’s financial entitlements and legal protections under family law in Pakistan.
The court directed that women should be given the right to decide whether they want to continue pursuing allegations of cruelty or seek divorce through khula. The ruling further stated that if cruelty is not proven but the marriage has effectively broken down, the wife must still have the freedom to choose her legal remedy.
The Supreme Court also remarked that courts cannot force individuals to remain in what it described as a “dead marriage.” Legal experts believe the judgment will significantly influence future family court proceedings across the country.
In another important aspect of the ruling, the apex court expanded the definition of domestic violence beyond physical abuse. The judgment stated that domestic abuse also includes psychological harm, emotional suffering, humiliation, neglect, coercion, and sustained mental distress.
The court clarified that mental cruelty includes emotional pain, severe psychological pressure, and continuous disregard for a spouse’s well-being. The ruling is expected to strengthen protections for women facing emotional and psychological abuse in domestic relationships.
The Supreme Court further explained that family disputes should be decided on the basis of “preponderance of probability” rather than the strict criminal standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt. It also instructed family courts not to demand unrealistic evidence such as FIRs or eyewitnesses in domestic violence and khula cases.
