In a significant ruling that touches both personal law and gender rights, the Kerala High Court has held that a Muslim man cannot register his second marriage under the Kerala Registration of Marriages (Common) Rules, 2008 without giving his first wife an opportunity to be heard. Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan, while dismissing a petition filed by a Muslim couple seeking registration of their second marriage, observed that "constitutional values of equality and fairness override personal laws when rights of women are affected."
Background
The case was brought by Muhammad Shareef C., aged 44, and Abida T.C., aged 38, from Kannur and Kasaragod districts respectively. The two claimed to have married in 2017 according to Muslim religious customs, even though Shareef's first marriage was still valid. The petitioners sought a direction to the local registrar to record their marriage officially, arguing that Muslim personal law allows a man to have up to four wives.
The registrar, however, refused to register the marriage, prompting the couple to approach the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Their counsel contended that the denial was arbitrary since Muslim law permitted the second marriage and that registration was merely a procedural formality to secure the legal status of their children and property rights.
Court's Observations
Justice Kunhikrishnan examined whether the local registrar was obliged to give notice to the first wife before registering a second marriage. The Court began by referring to earlier judgments, including Jubairiya v. Saidalavi N. (2025), which clarified that the Quran itself promotes monogamy as a principle and allows polygamy only as an exception - and that too, strictly conditioned on justice and fairness among wives.
"The spirit and intention of these verses is monogamy, and polygamy is only an exception," the judge quoted, recalling how the Quran emphasizes justice between spouses.
The judge noted that while Muslim law may permit a man to have multiple wives, "no scripture allows deception or concealment." He further observed,
"The Holy Qur’an or the Muslim law does not permit an extramarital relationship with another lady when the first wife is alive and the marriage with her is still subsisting."
The Court pointed out that under Rule 11 of the 2008 Rules, registrars must verify details before registration, including marital status and whether a spouse is already living. This, the Court said, ensures that authorities do not inadvertently validate marriages that contravene existing legal or moral obligations.
Constitutional Values Above Customary Practices
Justice Kunhikrishnan went on to explain that gender equality and human dignity form part of the constitutional guarantee under Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution, which the State and its authorities cannot ignore-even in matters involving personal law.
"Men are not superior to women. Gender equality is not a women’s issue; it is a human issue," the bench remarked, adding that religion must remain secondary when constitutional rights are at stake.
The Court observed that Muslim women cannot be silent spectators when their husbands seek to register a second marriage. Even though Islamic law permits polygamy under certain circumstances, the registration process must adhere to the principles of natural justice.
"Let Muslim women also get an opportunity of hearing when their husbands remarry, at least at the stage of registration," the judge wrote emphatically.
Decision
Concluding the 15-page order, Justice Kunhikrishnan held that the registrar must issue notice to the first wife if an application for registering a second marriage is received while the first marriage is still valid. If the first wife objects, the registrar should refrain from registering the marriage and refer the matter to a competent civil court for adjudication.
Since the first wife was not made a party in the present petition, the Court declined to interfere.
"The writ petition need not be entertained because the first wife is not even a party to this case," the judge stated.
The petition was accordingly dismissed, but with a clarifying direction that if the petitioners file a fresh application, the registrar must follow the due process including hearing the first wife.
Case Title: Muhammad Shareef C. & Anr. vs. State of Kerala & Anr.
Case Number: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 26010 of 2025
Date of Judgment: 30 October 2025