The Criminalization of Cruelty within the Malaysian and Pakistani
Family Laws: A Comparative Analysis
Ghulam Dastagir,
1
Faridah Hussain,
2
Daleleer Kaur Randawar
2
, Sheela Jayabalan
2
1
Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws, International Islamic University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
2
Faculty of Law, Universiti Teknologi MARA, UiTM, 40450 Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia
Key-words: Criminalization, Cruelty, Family Law, Malaysia, Pakistan
Abstract: The Muslim Family laws of Malaysia and Pakistan are based on Shari’ah, however they are codified laws
administered by modern day judicial system. Under these Muslim family laws, cruelty or inhuman treatment
can be a fault-based ground for the dissolution of a marriage and an avenue for legal remedies. Cruelty causes
mental and emotional trauma and may create intolerable conditions within spouses, also detrimental to the
children. In Pakistan, the problem is that the intention of framers of the Muslim family law are of protection
of the innocent rather than to punish the transgressor, therefore, divorce is possible, however no retribution
for the offending spouse. Conversely, cruelty or ill-treatment is a punishable offence under the Islamic family
laws of Malaysia. Adopting descriptive and analytical qualitative case study approach for this exploratory
study, the authors have argued that family courts in Pakistan are under legal obligation to decide matrimonial
issues with inclusion of cruelty and an appropriate venue dealing family violence. Hence, with the more
appropriate sentencing approaches, this paper intends to introduce a new offence of cruelty or ill-treatment of
spouses into the Pakistan’s family laws.
1 INTRODUCTION
Family is a basic unit of Islamic society. Islam
recognizes the family system and its respect and give
importance attached thereto.(Hafiz Abdul Waheed v
Miss Asma Jahangir,1997) In an Islamic state like
Pakistan, the purpose and formation of family law
is to preserve the marriage bond because in Islam
it is a meritorious institution. If family suffered from
inequality and permanent conflicts among the
partners, it will become very difficult for its just
survival. For that reasons, to recognize and
guaranteeing women’s human rights, the constitution
of Islamic Republic of Pakistan provides the
protection of marriage, the family, the mother and the
child.(Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan,
1973, Art’35)The Constitution of Pakistan allow and
guaranteed an adult woman free to marry according
to her choice and honour the right to seek
divorce.(Yefet, 2011) Due to this constitutional right
and legal permission, many women use their right to
choose their own spouse or seeking divorce from an
abusive husband.
The Family laws in Pakistan are based on the
Muslim personal laws that are relating to religions
(for Muslims, based on the primary sources of Islamic
law i.e. the Holy Qur’an and the Sunnah) as well as
for Hindus, Christians and other religious groups
according to their faiths.(Hashmi, 2007) Family laws
in Pakistan are a mixture of codified law and
customary practices based on religious norms though
administered in a secular procedural framework of a
modern-day dispute resolution forum of the judiciary.
(Ali, 2002)
The one significant problem attached thereto is
that Pakistan’s Muslim family law doesn’t recognise
cruelty or ill-treatment of any of the spouse a
punishable offence. Subsequently, the purpose of this
article is to consider the areas of family law in which
cruelty or ill-treatment is material and to examine the
principles which guide courts in determining what
constitutes sufficient cruelty to entitle a complainant
to relief.
This paper will focuses on the cruelty clauses of
two countries, practicing Islamic Family laws within
their judicial systems, Pakistan and Malaysia, and
discusses the problem of the recognition of the cruelty
amongst the two countries and provide an analysis on
the recognition criteria on cruelty. Part I will discuss
the cruelty clauses in Pakistan within marriages and
Dastagir, G., Hussain, F., Randawar, D. and Jayabalan, S.
The Criminalization of Cruelty within the Malaysian and Pakistani Family Laws: A Comparative Analysis.
DOI: 10.5220/0010054402810286
In Proceedings of the International Law Conference (iN-LAC 2018) - Law, Technology and the Imperative of Change in the 21st Century, pages 281-286
ISBN: 978-989-758-482-4
Copyright
c
2020 by SCITEPRESS Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
281
divorces, and will offer examples of how cruelty will
be established through court decisions in the country.
Part II will provide considerations on cruelty form the
Malaysian perspectives, and analyse the cruelty
clauses into the family laws of Malaysia and will
argues if Pakistan to emulate the Malaysian family
law responses to cruelty as that is also essential to
Muslim personal laws. Part III will provide
discussion and analysis and finally, Part IV will looks
at possible solutions for ending the problem of cruelty
that distract marriages. There is now a growing trend
of punishing nonviolent behaviour, because it causes
serious emotional suffering, hence, an answer to some
of these concerns maybe to develop a new offence of
cruelty.
1.1 Materials and Methods
In order to achieve the objective of this paper, the
authors have adopted qualitative legal research
approach. This study is critical and analytical in
nature. For analysing the available data i.e. case law
and legislation, researcher have employed the
primary sources of doctrinal approach. Then, for the
secondary sources of materials, the authors have
referred to the monographs and journal articles. By
using descriptive, exploratory and content analysis
approach, researchers have examined the court cases,
their background, as well as the approach of the
courts players that had been determined. The findings
of this paper will reflect the researchers’ abilities to
illustrate the phenomenon.
1.2 Cruelty within Pakistani Family
Courts Jurisdictions
Matrimonial matters are involved delicate human
relations. They are emotional issues as well. In the
context of Pakistan it is hypothetical that women are
under privileged and generally oppressed section of
the society, because of that the concept of social
justice rather than legal justice be advanced in
matrimonial matters and these relations could not be
judged on legal factors alone. For innumerable
Muslim women who are trapped in unhappy
marriages, facing unspeakable misery, the
Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939(DMMA)
finally recognised those women’s right to marital
freedom. (Cherry, 2001) As acknowledged by the
Supreme Court, in the case of Abid Hussain v.
Additional District Judge Ali Pur (2006)the aim to
establish DMMA, 1939was to protect women from
prolonged and costly litigation, as such it aimed to put
a clog on the right of husband.
The DMMA is the most important piece of
legislation promulgated during British colonial India
in the area of Muslim Family Laws inherited by the
Pakistan when become sovereign state in 1947. The
DMMA consolidates and clarifies the provisions of
Muslim Law relating to the valid grounds for
dissolution of marriage in a suit filed by the wife.
Under the DMMA, there are ten grounds have been
given for dissolution of Muslim marriages.(Manzoor,
2014) Due to limitations, the authors only produce the
Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, (1939, s, 2
(viii)); (Abdul Hafeez v Shamaila Bibi 2013)that
provides cruelty as a ground for dissolution of
marriage, whenever the husband treats his wife with
cruelty as follows: -
(a) habitually assaults her or make her life
miserable by cruelty of conduct even if such
conduct does not amount to physical ill-treatment,
(Sahibzada Sheheryar Abbasi v. Samia Abbasi
1992) or
(b) associates with women of evil repute or leads
an infamous life, (Abdul Hafeez v. Shamaila Bibi
and 2 others 2013) or
(c) attempts to force her to lead an immoral life,
(Malik Tanveer Khan v Mst. Amber Liaquat
2009) or
(d) disposes of her property or prevents her
exercising her legal rights over it, (Shahana Bibi
v. Nadeem Shah,, 2015;Bibi Anwar Khatoon v.
Gulab Shah, 1988) or
(e) obstructs her in the observance of her religious
profession or practice, or
(f) if he has more wives than one, does not treat
her equitably in accordance with the injunctions
of the Qur’an.(Ali Ishfaq, 2014)
Pakistani courts while interpreting cruelty
emphasised that cruelty can be either physical, mental
or even by conduct, as mentioned in clauses (b), (c),
(d) and (e) provided by DMMA subjected to evidence
produced by the parties. Along with physical torture
and beating. Cruelty includes habitual use of abusive
and insulting language to the wife, more importantly,
mental cruelty is the worst.(Muhammad Arif Khan v
Shakoor Akhtar, 1999) In the case of Arif Khan v
Shakoor Akhtar, the Appellate Court held that: -
“a Family Court is well within its competence to
dissolve a marriage, on the basis of Khula
doctrine, if from the material brought on record
and the evidence led by the parties, comes to the
conclusion that spouses cannot live a happy and
harmonious life within the prescribed limits
ordained by God.”(Muhammad Arif Khan v
Shakoor Akhtar, 1999)
iN-LAC 2018 - International Law Conference 2018
282
In this case, the Appellate Court concluded that
the cruelty grounds taken by the respondent in the
instant case for dissolution of marriage are not proved
by the direct evidence however, at the same time it is
very different rather impossible to prove cruelty by
direct evidence. Cruelty could be felt by close
association with spouse by watching different
happenings during wedlock and their habits. Mental
torture by husband also would amount to cruelty and
want of compatibility and disharmony of feelings and
thoughts could also result into discomfort and
hardship to live a harmonious life. The Court
emphasised that cruelty could be proved by direct
evidence, though it was something to be inferred by
conduct, behaviour and temperament of husband with
wife while living together. (Muhammad Arif Khan v
Shakoor Akhtar, 1999)
Maltreatment has been the most popular divorce
ground, as provided in the case of Syed Imtiaz
Hussain Shah v Mst. Razia Begum (2011) The
Appellate Court observed that infliction of injury is
not required by the law. In matrimonial matters, the
Court have been treated false allegation against a wife
to be a cruelty which results into mental torture and
loss of mutual confidence. Long ago, in the case of
Muhammad Shariful Islam Khan v Suraya Begum,
(1963) the Supreme Court ruled that the mental
cruelty is the worst within matrimonial settings. In the
same vein, the false allegation by the husband of a
chased woman as to chastity of a chased woman cuts
to the heart. Mental torture by husband also would
amount to cruelty and want of compatibility and
hardship to live a harmonious life. (Muhammad Arif
Khan v ShakoorAkhtar, 1999)
1.3 Cruelty within Malaysian Family
Courts Jurisdictions
In Malaysia, unhappy marriage is a ground for
divorce. In fasakh there are some grounds for
applying divorce. One of the grounds is cruelty.
Illustrations of cruelty are mentioned in Section
52(1)(h) of the Islamic Family Law (Federal
Territories) Act 1984 (Act 303). Section 52(1)(h)
states:
(h) that the husband or wife treats her or him, as
the case may be, with cruelty, that is to say, Inter
alia-
(i) habitually assaults her or him or makes her or
his life miserable by cruelty of conduct;
(ii) associates with women or men of evil repute
or leads what, according to Hukum Syara’, is an
infamous life;
(iii) attempts to force the wife to lead an immoral
life;
(iv) disposes of her or his property or prevents her
or him from exercising her or his legal rights over
it;
(v) obstructs her or him in the observance of her
or his religious obligations or practice; or
(vi) if he has more than one wife, does not treat
her equitably in accordance with the requirements
of Hukum Syara’;
Within the Islamic Family Law, a victim spouse
can free herself from the bondage of her violent
marriage by applying for dissolution of marriage
or fasakh under the Islamic Family law (Federal
Territories) Act 1984 on the grounds that her husband
treated her cruelly.(Randawar,2015)Cases involving
cruelty may be physical violence, (Joan Mary
Sulaiman v Sulaiman,1993) mental abuse, (Khairul
Faezah bt Hj Abdul Majid v Muhammad Salleh bin
Bidin, 2005) physically and mentally torture.(Khairul
Faezah bt Hj Abdul Majid v Muhammad Salleh bin
Bidin, 2005) It is to be noted that sufficient proof such
as documentary evidence is needed to satisfy the
court for fasakh on ground of cruelty. In the absence
of sufficient evidence, the court may dismiss the
application for divorce on ground of cruelty.(Abdul
Hanif v Rabiah, 1996) For interpretations of the
provisions of the statute, take for example from the
British case of Yemshaw v Lewisham Borough of
London, the Supreme Court of United Kingdom held
that “domestic violence” was not limited to physical
violence but comprehensively to: “threatening or
intimidating behaviour and any other form of abuse
which, directly or indirectly, may give rise to the risk
of harm”, as well as psychological harm. In the case
ofYeo Bee Lin v Lee Eng Chee, (2004)the High Court
of Malaysia was of the view that “when we talk about
'personal injuries' and 'injuries to his or her person’'
in s. 4A of Married Women Act, 1957, there can be
no distinction between injuries of a physical nature
and that of the mental variety; both are within this
definition. Hence, to distinguish between the two is
no longer relevant in the present day”. Section 127 of
the Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) Act
1984 provides that any person who ill-treats his wife
commits an offence and shall be punished with a fine
not exceeding one thousand ringgit or with
imprisonment not exceeding six months or with both
such fine and imprisonment.
In Malaysia, the perpetrator of cruelty may also be
convicted under section 326 of the Penal Code (Act
574) if there is sufficient evidence that the victim
applicant/wife sustained serious injuries and
hospitalized. (PP v Md Rashid Harun, 2000) Other
The Criminalization of Cruelty within the Malaysian and Pakistani Family Laws: A Comparative Analysis
283
than the Penal Code (Act 574), Malaysia has enacted
Domestic Violence Act 1994 (Act 521). The Act aims
to provide legal protection in situations of domestic
violence and matters incidental thereto. The wife may
initiate legal proceedings against her abusive
husband. The wife may also applied for an injunction
to restrain husband from assaulting, harassing and
molesting her. She may also claim for damages.
(Mohamed Habibullah Mahmood v Faridah bte
Dato’ Talib, 2005)Moreover, under Married Women
Act 1957, which is also apply both Muslims and non-
Muslims, section 4A and 9 states that a spouse can be
prosecuted from offences ranging from murder to
common assault. On the other hand, for non-Muslims,
according to Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce)
Act, 1976 s 54(1) (b) states that if the respondent has
behaved in such a way that the petitioner cannot
reasonably be expected to live with the respondent,
(for example molestation) the marriage has
irretrievably broken down.
To summarise, in Malaysia, it could be argued that
victim in cruelty cases may apply for divorce and
claim for damages. The wrongdoer may be sentence
to imprisonment for causing physical injury.
1.4 Results and Discussions
In worldview, the concept of cruelty has been slowly
transformed with the passage of time and the impact
of new ideas on to it based on a strictly rational
outlook of life by the development of modern life.
Cruelty will always be an uncertain part of the law of
divorce. Cruelty is a conduct that might make the
victim's life extremely uncomfortable and miserable.
For centuries cruelty was an acknowledged cause for
divorce, both physical torture and domestic battery or
even if mentally tormenting, the offending spouse
was widely considered unfair and unjust. (Ramsey,
2013)The problem is that the conduct which amounts
to cruelty has misunderstood profoundly. Statutes
that criminalise cruelty define it in terms of physical
hurt alone, and underestimate injuries inflicted
throughout the battering relationship and the context
of abuse. Moreover, the statutes have failed to
criminalise the true nature of cruelty that is a patterns
of power, control, and violence and have significant
impact on its victims. Though, it could be argued that
in cruelty, emotional, mental and psychological
agony and suffering can cause physical effects and
vice versa, physical pain and suffering can also cause
psychological and mental pain and sufferings.
(Tetlow, 2016)
Family law or personal laws, as they are more
commonly referred to, are particular reference to the
position of women in Pakistan.(Tetlow, 2016) The
problem is that it is built of the society that in
Pakistani family system, the men of the family (the
fathers, uncles and brothers) hold the right to make
marital decisions for their women. This is the reason
that more than 95 percent of all marriages in Pakistan
are arranged by male family members. (Khan,
2006) So as the case, contrary to legislative text and
despite clear injunctions and constitutional
guaranties, divorce is a matter of life and death for
Pakistani women. In Pakistan, a woman is considered
a burden and divorce is extremely shameful, which
results for many families refusing to aid or assist the
divorced woman. (Naz and Zia, 2008)
The finding and analysis of the statues on family
laws of both Pakistan and Malaysia suggested that
they have the same substance on cruelty, either on the
formation of cruelty clauses or of evidentiary
standards. To be proved cruelty, petitioners requires
strict burden of proof beyond any reasonable doubt as
required by their criminal justice systems. Some of
the cruelty clauses are intact with the respective penal
codes of both countries. The significance of
Malaysian Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories)
Act, 1984 is that through sections 127 and 128, both
of these provisions made cruelty is a punishable
offence. Moreover, Malaysia has an established
Prevention of Domestic Violence Act (Act 521) of
1994 who effectively deals with family violence
incidents more than two decades. Access to justice for
Malaysian women also have some advantages due to
its society’s shape where high education rate and
economic independent role makes Malaysian women
a visible and harassment is no more a significant issue
in this society.
On the other hand, in compare to Malaysian
women, the Pakistani sisters have suffered most due
to their passive role within families and society. They
are almost invisible in economic activities, having
lowest education rate in the world. In case of any
victimization in the hands of very people who
supposed to protect them from unnecessary abuse, the
whole situation makes their access to justice
impossible. Unfortunately, Pakistani women still lack
of any functional law on domestic violence until
today. Many efforts have been done so far to establish
any law on domestic violence, unfortunately all
efforts ended up with disappointments. In this
situation Pakistani women have very limited access to
justice and due to the prevailed tribal and feudal code
Pakistan is considered one of the worst country in the
world for women. (Shah, 2011)
The Pakistani woman is defined in terms of her
role as a mother and a wife and her worth is dependent
iN-LAC 2018 - International Law Conference 2018
284
on her marital status since her legal and social status
are tied to her husband’s will. Pakistani women have
fought for equal rights since inception, however, their
struggle for equal rights has been largely unsuccessful
because Pakistani women are still treated as second-
class citizens who do not deserve the same respect as
men have. The rights of the husband to judge, control,
and punish their wives were transcribed into books,
thus legitimating their subjugation through force.
(Cubbon, 2000). If that is the situation then the
empowerment of women will only begin from family.
If women enjoy respect, freedom of thought, full
participation in decision making in the family life,
free from all sort of violence within family and
outside home, consequently it will produce well
behaved responsible citizens of any society.
Since gender violence is mostly a family matter
and it gets aggravated during litigation hence the
family court must also have jurisdiction to entertain
application of a woman being harassed in the context
of their family dispute.(Hashmi, 2007) Family Courts
in Pakistan are special tribunals established for a
purpose, hence had powers to mould the relief and
grant injunctions in the interest of justice, even if not
asked.(Mohammad Ahamd v Samia bano, 2002)As
evidenced in the case of Mst. Neelam Nosheen v Raja
Muhammad Khaqaan, the Apex Court held that most
of the Pakistani population belongs to oppressed
class, predominantly lived in isolated and backward
regions where the petitioners could not have proper
legal assistance, so substantial responsibility lay on
the family courts in dealing with the family
matters.(Mst. Neelam Nosheen v Raja Muhammad
Khaqaan, 2002)In such situation justice was the
ultimate responsibility of the family courts so that
they have to deliver the same in even-handed matters.
1.5 Conclusions and Recommendations
In a society where due to prevailing patriarchal
culture and norms a battered wife could be deterred
from taking action to protect herself, for example, to
file a suit for protection, or calling the police, because
of the threats or fear of any harm or filing criminal
charges, there must be a mechanism and remedy
which could be availed by the victim spouse. In
theory, once a spouse becomes a victim of torture and
violence from the other, in that case that act should be
considered as matrimonial offence and criminal
sanctions should be visited upon the guilty spouse.
(Hor, 2011)This is because it is to be believed that
people should be held accountable for their actions
harmful for an individual or against society and the
criminal justice system should establish such
accountability and consider it. (Layne, 2015)
In Pakistan, cruelty has many facets which covers
penal liabilities i.e. and became a subject for family
courts when the Family Court Act, 1964 was
amended in 2002. In practice, cases relating to cruelty
that covers any form of family violence were heard
by the ordinary criminal and civil courts in the
traditional administration of criminal justice.
Unfortunately the amendments that introduced in
2002 into the Pakistan’s Family Court Act, 1964, no
court have taken cognizance of cases family violence
till this date. The establishment of family courts have
a purpose that is to provide protection to the weaker
member of the society from tyranny, highhandedness
and upper hand of man. In this way, as a senior judge
of the Court of Sessions in Pakistan asserts, to
introducing severe cruelty and other family violence
provisions into the family law could be considered
remarkable because women victims might feel more
comfortable alleging family violence issues into the
family courts. (Munir, 2006)
There remains a need for further and more
comprehensive amendments in family laws, so that
this article proposes the induction of an offence of
cruelty into the Pakistani family law statutes with
appropriate sentencing approach and provisions that
will helpful in progressing the criminal justice
response to matrimonial offences and Pakistan has to
emulate the Section 127 and 128 of the Islamic
Family Law (Federal Territories) Act, 1984 into their
Family Justice System which sanctioned prison
sentence as well as fine for guilty spouse. In principle,
physical or emotional abuse occurs within the family
caused severe distress, in that case the justice system
in Pakistan must provide an outlet for the
criminalisation of cruelty in the era of 21
st
century.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This paper is part of first author’s Ph.D study at
Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws, International
Islamic University Malaysia. The authors would like
to thank Prof. Dr. Najibah Mohd Zin and Asst. Prof.
Dr. Iqbal Abdul Wahab of Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah
of Laws, International Islamic University Malaysia
for their guidance, vision and sharing ideas.
REFERENCES
Ali Ishfaq, (2014). Manual of Family Laws, fifth Edition
(Lahore: Imran Law Book House).
The Criminalization of Cruelty within the Malaysian and Pakistani Family Laws: A Comparative Analysis
285
Ali, S. S. (2002). Testing the Limits of Family Law Reform
in Pakistan: A Critical Analysis of the Muslim Family
Laws Ordinance 1961. International Survey of Family
Law, 317.
Cherry, K. (2001). Marriage and Divorce Law in Pakistan
and Iran: The Problem of Recognition. Tulsa Journal of
Comparative & International Law, 9, 319.
Cubbon, S. (2000). The Dismantling of Patriarchy. UCL
Jurisprudence Review. 253.
Daleleer Kaur Randawar, Dr. [2015] Law Reform
(Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976: Application with
regards to Violence within a Home, 5 The Malayan Law
Journal, lxviii [Accessed through LexisNexis] retrieved
on 23 July 2018.
Hor, M. (2011). Relatively Criminal: Spouses and the
Criminal Process. Singapore Journal of Legal Studies,
37.
Khan, T. S. (2006). Beyond Honour: a Historical
Materialist Explanation of Honour Related Violence.
Oxford University Press, USA.at page 237.
Layne, S. R. (2015). What Happened to Till Death Do Us
Part: Bringing Back Fault as the Exclusive Ground for
Divorce. Journal of Law & Social Deviance, 9, 80.
Munir, M. A. (2006). Family Courts in Pakistan in Search
of Better Remedies for Women and Children. Lawasia
Journal., 191.
Ramsey, C. B. (2013). The Exit Myth: Family Law, Gender
Roles, and Changing Attitudes Toward Female Victims
of Domestic Violence. Michigan Journal of Gender &
Law, 20, 1.
Tetlow, T. (2016). Criminalizing Private Torture. William
& Mary Law Review, 58, 183.
Yefet, K. C. (2011). The Constitution and Female-Initiated
Divorce in Pakistan: Western Liberalism in Islamic
Garb, 34, Harvard Journal of Law & Gender, 553, 558.
Zeeshan Manzoor, (2014) Women and the Related Laws,
(Karachi: Mega Publishers).
Reports
Naz, Rukhshanda and Maliha Zia. 2008. Muslim Family
Laws in Pakistan. Aurat Foundation. [online] URL:
<http://www.musawah.org/sites/default/files/Pakistan-
report%20for%20Home%20Truths.pdf> retrieved on
22 July 2018
Shah Saeed, “The Worst places in the world for women:
Pakistan”. The Guardian, 14 June 2011 [Access online]
Available from
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/14/worst-
places-in-the-world-for-women-pakistan> accessed on
23 April, 2018
Syeda Viquar-un-nisa Hashmi, ‘The Impact of Family
Laws on the Rights of Divorced Women in Pakistan’
National Commission on the Status of Women [Online]
URL:<http://www.ncsw.gov.pk/previewpublication/2>
retrieved on 20 July 2018.
.
Legislations
The Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.
The Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939.
Domestic Violence Act, 1994 (Act 521).
The Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) Act, 1984
(Act 303)
Pakistan Family Court Act, 1964,
Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act, 1976 (Act 164).
Malaysian Penal Code, (Act 574).
The Married Women Act, (1957).
Case laws
Abdul Hafeez v. Shamaila Bibi 2013 MLD 1148 Azad-
Kashmir.
Abid Hussain v. Additional District Judge Ali Pur, District
Muzaffar Grah 2006 SCMR 100.
Abdul Hanif v Rabiah (1996) 11 JH 47.
Bibi Anwar Khatoon v. Gulab Shah and 2 others PLD 1988
Karachi 602.
Hafiz Abdul Waheed v. Miss Asma Jahangir, PLD 1997
Lah.301.
Joan Mary Sulaiman v Sulaiman (1993) 10 JH 8 86).
Khairul Faezah bt Hj Abdul Majid v Muhammad Salleh bin
Bidin [2005] 1 ShLR 171.
Malik Tanveer Khan v. Mst. Amber Liaquat 2009 CLC
1210 Peshawar.
Mohammad Ahamd v. Samia bano, 2002 CLC 209.
Muhammad Afzal v. Additional District Judge Attock,
2010 CLC 369 Lahore.
Muhammad Arif Khan v. ShakoorAkhtar, 1999 YLR 985.
Mohamed Habibullah Mahmood v Faridah bte Dato’ Talib
[2005] 1 SHLR 71.
Mst. NeelamNosheen v. Raja Muhammad Khaqaan 2002
MLD 784.
Muhammad Shariful Islam Khan v. Suraya Begum, PLD
1963 Dhaka 947.
PP v Md Rashid Harun [2000] 3 MLJ 503
Sahibzada Sheheryar Abbasi v. Samia Abbasi 1992 MLD
159.
Shahana Bibi v. Nadeem Shah and 3 others, 2015 MLD
1623.
Syed Imtiaz Hussain Shah v. Mst. Razia Begum, 2011 SCR
233.
Yeo Bee Lin v Lee Eng Chee (2004) 1 CLJ 691.
Yemshaw v Lewisham Borough of London [2011] UKSC
3 [28].
Zarina bt. Shaari v Mohd Yusoff b Omar [2005] 4 ShLR
iN-LAC 2018 - International Law Conference 2018
286