Allahabad HC dismisses plea of Muslim woman, Hindu live-in partner seeking protection

The court said a legally-wedded Muslim wife cannot go outside marriage and her live-in arrangement with another man would amount to fornication and an act forbidden by Allah according to Sharia law.

Prayagraj (UP): Denying any protection to a married Muslim woman who is in a live-in relationship with a Hindu man, the Allahabad High Court has said a legally-wedded Muslim wife cannot go outside marriage and her live-in arrangement with another man would amount to fornication and an act forbidden by Allah according to Sharia law.

Dismissing a petition filed by the woman and her live-in partner seeking protection due to a 'threat' to her life from her father and other relatives, a bench of Justice Renu Agarwal said her 'criminal' act 'cannot be supported and protected' by the court.

Observing that the petitioner has not acquired any decree of divorce from her husband and is engaged in a live-in relationship, the court said, 'The first petitioner is living with the second petitioner in contravention of the provisions of Muslim Law (Shariat), wherein a legally-wedded wife cannot go outside marriage and this act of Muslim women is defined as 'Zina' (fornication) and 'Haram' (an act forbidden by Allah).' The petitioners had claimed that the woman's father and relatives were interfering in their peaceful live-in relationship.

According to the facts of the case, the woman was married to Mohsin, who remarried two years ago and is now cohabiting with his second wife. Following this, the petitioner moved back to her matrimonial home, but facing abuse from her husband, opted to reside with a Hindu man in a live-in relationship.

During the course of the hearing, the state's counsel opposed the woman's plea by submitting that since she had not obtained any decree of divorce from her husband and started living with the second petitioner, which amounted to adultery, their relationship could not be protected by law.

The court, in its judgment dated February 23, observed that since the woman had not moved any application to the authority concerned for converting her religion in accordance with the law in this regard and also not obtained divorce from her husband, she was not entitled to any protection.