Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, part of a three-judge bench, including Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, explained that in Islam, spouses are not compelled to live together if harmony and happiness are unattainable. He provided this explanation in a judgment related to an appeal by Sohail Ahmed against a decision by the Sindh High Court (SHC) last year.
The case revolves around the marriage of Sohail Ahmed and Samreena Rasheed, a Pakistani American, registered in New York under Islamic law with a dower amount of $5,000. Allegedly, within nine months of marriage, Sohail’s behavior became harsh, and he returned to Pakistan, leading to strained relations. Samreena filed for Khula, seeking the dissolution of the marriage.
Sohail contested the suit, arguing that Pakistani courts had no jurisdiction as the marriage occurred in the US. The family court dismissed this, and after reconciliation attempts, a Khula decree was granted on April 10, 2021. Sohail challenged this in the SHC, which decided on February 6, 2023.
The Supreme Court, after examining the case, affirmed that Pakistani family courts have jurisdiction in such matters. It emphasized that the court rightly exercised jurisdiction as the wife was a dual citizen, and the husband was a Pakistani resident. Despite the wife residing in the US during the suit’s initiation, the court held jurisdiction due to her connections with Pakistan.
The court referenced a verse from Surah Baqra describing the right and mode of Khula. In this case, the family court’s preliminary decree for Khula was found to comply with the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964.
The judgment noted that the respondent had contracted a second marriage in the US after the Khula decree. It highlighted the petitioner’s attempts to contract a second marriage in Pakistan, indicating that he was unnecessarily involving the respondent in litigation despite the marriage being dissolved.