3 min readLucknowJul 4, 2026 05:25 AM IST
First published on: Jul 3, 2026 at 03:37 PM IST
The Allahabad High Court has dismissed three petitions filed by a man, as well as other accused, seeking to quash an FIR lodged on a complaint by his wife that she was allegedly subjected to gangrape twice under the pretext of ‘nikah halala’, including once when she was a minor, to remarry the same man.
A division bench of Justices JJ Munir and Tarun Saxena observed, “When it comes to criminal law, unless the law itself makes an exception, which it rarely does, there is absolutely no place for pleading personal laws governing marriage if, interlaced with a matrimonial relationship, a crime were committed.”
The bench added that the constitutionality of halala is not under challenge before the court. “… But, if under the garb of… halala, a minor girl is subjected to carnal relations… it would certainly attract provisions of the POCSO Act,” it said.
The court further observed, “We are minded to say that this case presents the picture of a part of our society that is far removed from constitutional values and… aspirations of equality, privacy, personal dignity and whatever Articles 21 and 14 of the Constitution stand for…”
“… We do not by any means intend to say that in this petition, that is not framed that way, that we propose or suggest anything about the constitutionality of a given practice… But the circumstances of this case, and whatever has happened… prima facie… militates against the constitutional aspirations and guarantees… In fact, the entire facts that have so far come on record, are shocking to the conscience,” it observed.
The court was hearing three writ petitions jointly seeking to quash an FIR lodged on December 9, 2025, under various BNS sections including 85 (penalising a husband or relatives for physical/mental cruelty), 64 (rape), 70(2) (gangrape), section 3/4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 (for giving triple talaq) and Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act in Amroha district.
The co-accused named in the FIR are a cleric as well as the husband’s brother and nephew who allegedly raped the woman on the pretext of halala. The victim was 16 years old when the first incident took place, as per the FIR and the victim’s statement detailed in the court order.
The bench observed that the first halala prima facie constitutes statutory rape and offences under the POCSO Act, and the second instance prima facie constitutes a case of gangrape. Dismissing the writ petitions, the court stated in the order that the matter requires thorough investigation.
The bench added that the constitutionality of halala is not under challenge before the court. (File Photo) 
Share
