SC rules wife’s right to maintenance not linked to Rukhsati

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has ruled that a woman’s right to maintenance (nafaqa) is neither dependent on consummation nor on rukhsati (bride’s departure from her parents’ to husband’s home), and cannot be subjected to the husband’s discretion.

A two-member bench comprising Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi issued a written verdict, setting aside a Lahore High Court ruling and upholding the woman’s appeal.

The court held that a holistic reading of contemporary Islamic jurisprudence, statutory enactments, constitutional protections, and judicial precedents affirm that a wife’s right to maintenance is neither contingent upon consummation or rukhsati, nor subject to the discretion of the husband. It flows unconditionally from the solemnization of a valid marriage and constitutes a binding legal duty.

It stated: “The only legitimate ground to suspend this obligation is if the husband can prove that the wife has wholly and without justification withdrawn from the marital relationship — understood not merely as physical access, but encompassing emotional, residential, and relational life. Absent such proof, the obligation to provide maintenance persists.”

The verdict noted that in a patriarchal society, where economic dependence often fuels systemic injustice, the right to maintenance must be safeguarded as an essential constitutional, legal, and ethical entitlement. Any attempt to curtail it must face strict constitutional and jurisprudential scrutiny.

“Maintenance flows not from dominance, but from the mutual obligations and moral fabric that underpin the marital bond. Any interpretation that reduces this right to the wife’s subordination negates the ethical core of the relationship as envisioned by both the Qur’an and constitutional values such as dignity, equality, and non-discrimination,” the judgment stated. “The entitlement to maintenance thus must be understood as a recognition of the wife’s role in nurturing the marital relationship, not as a reward for submission, but as a legal and moral consequence of her commitment to that relationship”.

The reductive formulation, which treats marriage as a transactional exchange of physical obedience for material support, is incompatible with the Qur’anic vision of marriage as a solemn covenant based on affection and compassion.

The court further said that rukhsati is merely a customary practice marking the bride’s departure from her parental home, and holds no independent legal status under Islamic or statutory law.  A wife’s willingness to enter into the marital relationship is evidenced by her acceptance at the time of marriage, and her right to maintenance becomes absolute once she demonstrates such willingness, even if rukhsati has not yet taken place.

Conditioning a wife’s right to maintenance on rukhsati or consummation, the SC warned, undermines legal certainty and allows husbands to evade their financial responsibilities by invoking social customs or delaying the process.

The court ruled that the petitioner’s right to maintenance took effect from the solemnisation of marriage and remained valid until the dissolution of the marriage. Since the divorce took place during the pendency of the case, the court clarified that maintenance would continue until the completion of the iddat period.