POLYGAMY A LEGAL TABOO

AN ANALYSIS OF SECTION 6 OF MUSLIM FAMILY LAW ORDINANCE 1961 VIS-A-VIS ITS APPLICATION AND EXECUTION BY THE COURTS

By:
RAFAQAT BASHIR AWAN
Advocate High Court, Rawalpindi

Polygamy is a marital affair which has either been restricted, curtailed or prohibited under different laws or taken as taboo under different and various social norms. Pakistan is no exception to this phenomenon. Pakistan is an Islamic ideological state and family laws are presumed to be in accordance with the Islamic Injunctions yet the concept of polygamy has been guarded against with certain restrictions and legal requirements.

Before adverting to the logical interpretation of the concept of polygamy and its application in Pakistan we have to understand and construct correctly the relevant law i.e Section 6 of Muslim Law Ordinance, 1961. Section 6 of the said ordinance describes the condition before marrying or solemnizing second marriage and after perusing the said section one can easily understand that if a person conducts or wants to conduct the second marriage during the subsistence of the existing marriage, he has to seek permission from the Arbitration Council.

A grave misunderstanding amongst the masses is observed that in any case a person who wants to conduct second marriage has to seek permission from the arbitration council. I am afraid that is not the case, permission from the council is required only in case where the marriage does exist between the parties but it never subsists as required under the law. Meaning thereby that while a couple is living together, performing their matrimonial obligations, in that eventuality if the husband wants to conduct another marriage then he has to seek permission from the council and if they are living apart from each other and the marriage does exist but they are not performing their marital obligation by all means then we cannot say that there is subsistence of the existing marriage between the parties.

We have to draw line between the concept of existence of marriage and the subsistence of existing marriage. A marriage may be existing between spouses but it may not be subsisting as a family, spouses are living apart and Ghair Abadi is present among them. To my mind, in the situation discussed, we cannot say that the marriage is subsisting between them although it does exist by all legal means.

Therefore, the requirement of law, before making a husband bound down to recourse and resort to arbitration council before getting solemnize the second marriage, that there should be subsistence of marriage between spouses and not near existence of marriage.

As per the black's law dictionary the definition of subsistence as well as existence of something is defined as: "subsistence means to support and to maintain etc" while existence means "the things which is present or remain for time being or for certain period of time".

No permission is required by law if a marriage is existing but not subsisting. In order to avail shelter of the Section 6 of Family Muslim Law Ordinance, 1961, one has to prove that marriage between spouses is not only existing legally but also subsisting between them.

Therefore, to my view all proceeding against those husband who conduct second or further marriages during the Ghair Abadi period of their first marriage, are illegal proceedings and also against the varies of the Section 6 of the Family Muslim Law Ordinance, 1961. They are being incarcerated for nothing. Courts have to construct the law in its true letter and spirits, undue favoritism in favour of female spouse is not warranted under the law. Court should not overshadow law and justice by over overwhelming spring of femininism, as it would create dis-balance for dispensation of justice and the equilibrium of equity and fair play would be disturbed which would consequent upon injustice, blackmailing in particular segment of society.

I hope view point on the construction of Section 6 of Family Muslim Law Ordinance, 1961 would be taken to consideration and hopefully pondered over by legal fertility.

I being student of law lay my interpretation regarding the above cited issue before my fallows and I hope it would be appreciated or corrected if I am wrong.