Author: Rachna R Kurup
2nd Year BBA LL.B
Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad
Abstract: Option of puberty is a concept that evolved from the Muslim personal law which later got inculcated in the Hindu personal law as well. As per Muhammad law, the option of puberty is a right available to the parties of the marriage to repudiate the marriage if it was entered by them before they attained the age of puberty. All personal laws emphasize the importance of consent as an essential for a valid marriage but it is sometimes not taken into consideration by people. This concept plays a very important role in reducing the patriarchal power used to influence minor parties as well as to wash out the limit of the minor parties to repudiate any marriage which was entered before attainment of puberty and without their proper consent. This paper is a critical study on the concept of the option of puberty in Muslim as well as in the Hindu personal law and to analyse the relevance of the concept in society. The paper also tries to study various judicial interpretations related to this concept.
Marriage is a universal social institution. It’s a legally sanctioned union usually between a man and a woman as husband and wife. Legally, marriage is a binding contract between two parties that joins their income, possession, and love. As per the legal dictionary, the relationship between husband and wife is a legal, consensual, and contracted relationship recognized and sanctioned by law and dissolvable only by law.
The legal requirements and rules around marriages differ from state to state. In India, marriages are governed by personal laws. Different personal laws in India define marriage laws. These personal laws lay down some essentials for a valid marriage, for the grounds of dissolution, maintenance of spouse and children, inheritance, succession, and adoption. Although the requirements differ based upon the religion of the parties involved in a marriage, there are certain common essentials required for every marriage to be valid, such as consent. Consent is a very important requirement for a marital union. Attaining the age of majority is one of the most essentials for marriage between two parties and then comes capacity of the parties, which refers to the mental ability of the parties of a marital union to understand the nature of a marriage and its related responsibilities. The parties who have not attained majority are considered to not have reached the proper mental capacity to give consent for the marriage. Therefore a marriage between parties who have not attained the age of majority is considered to be voidable. Anything done by a minor during minority will not destroy the rights that they could have got enforced after the majority. Therefore the assent of the parties to a marriage should come after the majority and not before that.
Earlier in the marriage of a minor was contracted by his or her guardian then he/she had no right to repudiate the marriage even after attaining the age of puberty. Most of the Islamic schools give more importance to father and grandfather and they were provided with the freedom of deciding the marriage of a girl even without her consent. The rights of a minor girl to repudiate her marriage was totally limited.
This disability has been repealed by section 13(2) (IV) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and by the dissolution of the Muslim Marriage Act, 1939. In recent years, the dissolution of the Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 prohibits the wide authority of the father and paternal grandfather which was prevalent before, to bind a minor girl in marriage. A minor person cannot enter into a marriage contract legally and the marriage of a minor person contracted by his/her guardian on his/her behalf is also not binding on them. The minor person on reaching puberty can repudiate that marriage if he/she wants to. This particular concept is known as the option of puberty. This concept prevailed in Muslim personal law and is now extended to Hindu personal laws with some changes. According to the Muslim personal law and the Hindu personal law, the minors who have been married before the age of majority can repudiate the marriage through a concept known as the option of puberty (Khyar-ul-Bulgh as per Muslim law).
Meaning of the concept
The option of puberty or Khyar-ul-Bulgh is a concept which evolved from the Muslim personal law. The option of puberty is one of the most important principles observed in both Muslim and Hindu personal law. The option of puberty is a right available to the parties of marriage if their marriage was contracted before attaining puberty. According to this provision, the parties can repudiate the marriage which was contracted by some other person on behalf of the minors. Thus the concept of the option of puberty gives a right to the parties of the marriage to repudiate the marriage on attaining puberty and before attaining the age of 18 years. According to Hedaya, puberty occurs in girls by the onset of menstruation and the first nocturnal seminal emission in boys.
The main objective of the option of puberty was to act as an instrument against the existing laws which give more importance to patriarchy where the marriage was entered into a contract by the patriarchal guardians on behalf of minors, even at a very small age. This provides a safeguard against a detrimental marriage. It will allow the women to repudiate the marriage which was entered into a contract by forcing them either directly or indirectly or by fraud or undue influence as they had not attained the sufficient mental and physical maturity to give consent to the marriage.
In Islam, mutual consent is considered to be the foundation of every marital relationship. The concept of the option of puberty takes root from the Quran itself through the story of Hazrat Aisha and her marriage to the prophet which has been interpreted in different ways by different schools of Sharia law. According to Shia law, an individual who has been married before attaining the age of puberty can repudiate it, if the marriage occurred through fraud or if the guardian of the minor involved in the marriage was someone else other than the father or grandfather of the minor. In case of the marriage of a minor, the consent of the guardian is very important and a minor’s marriage contracted without the consent of the guardianship will be null and void.
The dissolution of the Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 has changed the right of females related to the option of puberty. This particular Act codifies the option of puberty and takes away the widespread authority given to guardians of the minor. But this particular Act only provides this right to wife and has no mention about the husband. Earlier, a person was not allowed to repudiate the marriage after recovery of reason under Muslim law but this Act created a common provision for all marriages contracted by the father or any guardian. The minor had the right to repudiate the marriage after attaining puberty which can be extended up to 15 years but after the introduction of this Act, the minor could exercise this right after attaining 15 years of age and before attaining 18 years of age. 
The rule regarding the option of puberty is that a minor girl who was unacquainted with the marriage holds this right until she reaches the stage where she has proper awareness and understands the responsibilities of marriage and this option is extended until she knows the fact that she has the right to repudiate the marriage. This option is lost in Muslim marriage if the wife after reaching puberty consummates the marriage that is because consummation is considered to be an implied consent from both the parties of the marriage. However, consummation should take place only after attaining puberty in case of a minor wife and it should not happen against her will or consent.
The consent of parties to a marriage is the most important element of marriage. It gives them mental satisfaction that whatever they are doing, they are doing with their free will. If the consent of the parties is obtained through fraud, coercion, or misrepresentation then the marriage will be considered voidable at the option of the party whose consent was not obtained for marriage. Thus for a marriage to be valid the consent of the parties should be free of fraud, coercion, and misrepresentation, etc.
India is a country consisting of various religions, cultures, and ethnic groups that have their particular characters and attitudes towards the marriage laws of India. There is no uniform code applicable to every religion regarding marital laws. Like Hindu and Muslim personal laws, there are different laws applicable to Parsis, Christians, etc. In all religious systems, the consent of the guardian is of prime importance in the case of marriage of a minor.
This particular concept brought lots of major changes regarding the rights of women to the option of puberty. Thus, the option of puberty is a right available to the minor girl to repudiate her marriage and now through different judicial precedents, this concept also has expanded to a larger extent. The relevance of this concept is immense, it acts as a guard against the patriarchal authority by giving the minor to repudiate the marriage which was contracted without her consent.
OPTION OF PUBERTY UNDER MUSLIM LAW
In Muslim law, the guardian of the minor has all the rights to authorize the marriage of the minor. The consent and the presence of the minor during the contract of marriage is essentially not required. The consent of the minor is not a mandatory essential for the solemnization of the marriage if the marriage is solemnized by the guardian. As per the Hanafi law, guardianship falls upon the male patrilineal kin in the similar order as that in which they come in residuary heirs such as father, grandfather, full brother, consanguine brother, etc. The senior-most among them will be the potential guardian authorized for the marriage of the minor. He should be mentally stable and should have attained the age of majority. If he is a minor or an insane person, then he will be disqualified from being the guardian and the guardianship will be passed onto the next person on in the preferred order. If any marriage is contracted without the consent of the guardian then such marriage will be considered a void marriage.
All Muslim law schools give the utmost importance and authority to the father or the paternal grandfather and they had all the rights against the marriage of the minor. This authority of the guardians to bind the minor in marriage gave rise to the right of a minor to avoid the marriage contracted in their absence by the exercise of option of repudiation in Hanafi law and the option of ratification in Shia law.
If a Muslim minor is entered into a marriage by the father or paternal grandfather then the rights of the minor are so restricted to avoid the marriage. In such cases, the option of puberty can be exercised only if the minor could prove that the guardian has acted fraudulently or to manifest his disadvantage. But if the marriage is solemnized by any other guardian other than the father or the paternal grandfather then under the Hanafi law, a minor has the right to repudiate the marriage upon attaining the age of puberty. Shia school of Muslim law is different from Hanafi and as per Shia Muslim school of law, any marriage of the minor contracted by a guardian other than the father or grandfather is fully ineffective unless and until it is repudiated by the minor upon reaching the majority. In other words, in Hanafi law school the minor has the right to repudiate a marriage which is valid and binding if not repudiated and in Shia law school, the minor has the right to repudiate the marriage that is not binding and effective if not repudiated. In both the schools, the minor can only exercise the right to repudiate the marriage if the marriage was contracted by someone else other than the father or paternal grandfather.
Under the new law, the power of the father and the paternal grandfather to contract the marriage had been restricted by Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939. According to this section, the minor has the right to repudiate the marriage contracted by the father, paternal grandfather, or any other grandfather upon reaching the age of puberty provided that the marriage is not consummated. This Act applies to all Muslims regardless of their school.
This act also provides a statutory right to the minor girl to repudiate the marriage contracted by her father or paternal grandfather without having to prove that they had acted fraudulently. Under traditional Muslim law schools, a minor had to prove the fraudulent behaviour of her father or grandfather to repudiate the marriage.
Section 2(vii) of the Act provides, “that she having been given by her father or other guardians before she attained the age of fifteen years, repudiated the marriage before attaining the age of eighteen years; provided that the marriage has not been consummated”. This section codifies the concept of the option of puberty and eliminates all the power given to the father and grandfather before. Yet, it is important the right has to be exercised by the minor within a reasonable amount of time after attaining the age of puberty. The minor can instantly dissolve the marriage by exercising the option of puberty. She can also choose to agree with the marriage by giving consent by reaching puberty.
The right to option of puberty should be informed to a woman immediately upon reaching the age of puberty but in the case of a man, the right to option of puberty continues till he gives express or implied consent for marriage. Consent for the marriage can be given by consummating the marriage or by giving consideration such as dower. 
This particular law differs from the Shia law and is used differently. Under the Shia school of law, both the parties of the marriage should exercise the right to option of puberty by either repudiating the marriage or giving consent for the same. If the marriage is not repudiated or consented by the parties, then the marriage will have no validity.
Section 2(vii) of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 only gives the right to the minor wife to repudiate the marriage and does not consider the right of the husband for the same.
It is also mentioned in the section that the wife will lose the right to option of puberty if the marriage is consummated. It is mainly because the consummation of marriage upon attaining the age of puberty is considered as consent for marriage. But the consummation should take place only after reaching puberty and should not have been done by force and should be out of her will or consent.
In the Ghulam Fatima case, The Court held that the right to exercise the option of puberty seizes one in the year after the minor reaches puberty.
In the case of Hussaina v. Mst. JiwaniA seventeen-year-old girl challenged the contention made by the husband that the option of puberty could not be invoked as the minor did not exercise her right to option of puberty as soon as she professed the primary signs of menstruation. The Court held that Muhammadan law was promulgated for people living under different circumstances and therefore the law should be interpreted about the changing society and public feeling and therefore the option prevails until the girl accepts or agrees with the marriage.
In the case of Bismillah Begam v. Nure Muhammad, the Court held that the delay in repudiation should be considered from the date on which the girl is aware that she has a right to repudiate such marriage and not from the date of marriage itself.
The minor will lose the right to option of puberty if the marriage is consummated once she attains puberty. But according to Hedaya, if the consummation of wife has happened before her attaining the age of puberty, the consummation is not valid and also does not takes away her right to option of puberty because in such situations the consent of the minor wife cannot be assumed from her silence. Her consent in such circumstances can only be understood through her express conduct.
The right of the wife to repudiate the marriage will be done away by their silence after attaining puberty but in case of the husband, it is not done as such. He should show his consent through some express or implied ways, such as through cohabitation or by giving consideration such as dower.
It is also clear that the consummation of marriage of a minor girl before attaining the age of majority and without her consent or free will is not regarded as acceptance to the marriage. The consummation should only happen after she reaches the age of puberty and without any undue influence or force. The proviso of Section 2 (vii) clearly states that the option of puberty will be lost only if she consummates the marriage upon reaching puberty.
In the case of Ghulam Sakina v. Falak Sher, the Hon’ble Court held that marriage under Muslim law is like a contract and it should be out of free consent without any force or coercion.
In another case, i.e. of, Muhammed Hussain v. Meharban Hussain ,the wife was forced to consummate the marriage and the consummation happened was not of her free consent. The Hon’ble Court, in this case, held that if the consummation has happened without the free consent of the wife, then it will not take away her right to repudiate the marriage upon reaching puberty.
Consummation of marriage without the consent of the wife is not considered to disentitle the right of the wife from repudiating the marriage as it is held by many of the subcontinental Courts. But regarding the consideration or dower, there has not been any known reported cases.
In the case of Mahmuddin Nissan v. Meharban Hussain ,the Court held that if anything is done by the minor before reaching the age of majority, it won’t take away her right which would have accrued by the minor after reaching the age of puberty.
In the case of Faseela v. State of Kerala, the woman not only consummated the marriage but also gave birth to a child. In such circumstances, the option of puberty cannot be exercised as the consummation of marriage is considered as implied consent for marriage.
OPTION OF PUBERTY UNDER HINDU LAW
The idea of the option of puberty is also followed in Hindu personal laws. But after adopting the concept of the option of puberty and introduction of section 13(2) (iv) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the minor wife got the right to repudiate the marriage which she was entered into by her guardian before attaining puberty.
The idea of marrying a minor was unknown to Hindu society. According to the Rig Veda, for a minor to get married she should be fully grown up and should have completed her childhood. A very renowned Hindu physician and author of the Ayurveda book, Dhanwantri, said that a child born from a man who is younger than 24 years and girl below sixteen years will not live long and therefore sexual intercourse should not be held with a girl of very small age. But after a few years, the society became degenerated and child marriage became prevalent in the society which followed new Smritis. It supported minor marriages and compelled guardianship for the marriage of a minor and thus, the marriage of minors was not prohibited and the consent of the guardian was sufficient to hold the marriage valid. The law of guardianship was not dealt under the Dharmashastras. “King is the supreme guardian for all minors” is a wide principle within the Hindu law. The Karta of the Joint Hindu family was responsible for the protection of the minor. According to the oldest and most authoritative Smriti of the Hindu law, Yajanvalkya, the guardianship for the minor marriage was given to father, grandfather, any other paternal relation or the mother who was qualified to act as the guardian for the marriage of the minor. The primary right of giving the minor girl for marriage was vested upon the father of the girl. This right of the father will not be lost in any case unless he has deserted the child and the mother. Even if the father is alive, the marriage of the minor will not be considered invalid just because the consent of the father was not obtained. If the marriage of the minor was solemnized after necessary proceedings and without any fraud or force then such marriage will be valid. 
In the case of Mst. Kalawati v. Deviram, a 16-year-old girl was entered into marriage by her brother who was eighteen years of age. The Court held that the minority of the girl and her guardian will not make the marriage invalid and held the marriage valid.
But in the case of Kanti Devi v. Shri Ram Kalu, the Punjab High Court observed that the doctrine of Factum Falet has no application when the girl has not attained the age of 18 years on the day of marriage. If the parties continue to live like husband and wife, then the doctrine may be considered.
In the case of Premi v. Dayaram, The Court held that the marriage of a minor cannot be considered void because it violates the essence of a valid marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
In the case of Uma Shanker Prasad v. Smt. Radha The Court held that jurisdiction to grant an injunction when the marriage is solemnized between minors, is lacking for the Civil Courts.
Later, the amendment of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 added a new ground for divorce under Section 13. As per section 13(iv) of the act, “that her marriage(whether consummated or not) was solemnized before she attained the age of fifteen years and she has repudiated the marriage after attaining that age but before attaining the age of eighteen years”
The Hindu law adopted this particular concept from Muslim law. When compared to Muslim law, Hindu law is more liberal as the consummation of the marriage after attaining puberty will take away the right of the women to repudiate the marriage in Muslim law, while consummation of the marriage with the consent of the wife is not affecting the right of the women to exercise her right to option of puberty in case of Hindu law. Also in the case of Muslim law, it is provided for both the parties to marriage to either give consent or to repudiate the marriage. But, in Hindu law, it only provides such rights to the wife and not to the husband.
Also, the option of puberty possesses some serious problems as it specifically says that marriage can be repudiated by a woman whose marriage is solemnized before attaining the age of 15 years. According to the Hindu Marriage Act, for a valid marriage, the legal age for entering into a marriage is 18 years for woman. But here, section 13(iv) is giving some legitimacy to a marriage solemnized after the age of 15 years. A woman can only use her right to option of puberty if her marriage was solemnized before the age of 15 years. Also as per the Hindu law, a decree is essential to formally declare that the marriage repudiated.
In the case of Reeva Devi v. Mohinder Singh The petitioner claimed that she has repudiated the marriage before attaining the age of majority but the petition was filed after she attained the age of 18 years. The question before the Court of Law was whether the marriage was repudiated before the age of 18 years or not. The Hon’ble Court observed that the petitioner had not lived with the husband for even a single day after attaining majority. So, it can be inferred that the marriage was repudiated before attaining the age of 16 years.
In the case of Roop Narayan v. Union of Indian, the constitutional validity of the provision was challenged for being violative of the principle of equality. It was contended that the right has been provided to minor girls and to not minor boys. The Court rejected the petition and observed that there is a constitutional mandate available for such laws and as far as the right of the minor boy is concerned, they can approach the Court under The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.
In Ramesh Kumar v. Sunila Devi, The petition on behalf of the minor wife was filed by her brother. The husband took the defence that the brother did not have the locus standi as the father is still alive. The Court rejected the defence and observed that the brother does have the locus standi even if the father is alive.
The judiciary has interpreted the concept of an option of puberty in different ways according to the changing circumstances. The interpretations of the option of puberty differed according to the changing evolution of the law and society.
In the case of Tahra Begum v. the State of Delhi, The Hon’ble Court held the marriage of the girl who was 15 was not voiced. The Court also opined that according to Muslim law, the girl is entitled to choose the man whom she wants to marry and even the consent of the parent is not necessary for the same. The Court also said that the girl will have the right to reside with the man even if she has not reached the majority as long as she has reached the age of puberty.
In the case of Musmmat Chirag Bibi v. Ghulam Sarwar, a girl approached the Court to repudiate her marriage through the option of puberty. The husband challenged the appeal made by the wife on the ground that the marriage was contracted by her grandmother and not her father or grandfather. As at that point of time there was a lot of authority given to patriarchy, the Court refused to repudiate the marriage of the minor.
In the case of Mustafa v. Smt. KhursidaThe Hon’ble Court held that the option of puberty is a right given to the minor which will act as a blanket against the marriage contracted by their guardians without their consent. The Court also said that after the codification of law under the dissolution of the Muslim Marriage Act, 1939, the party no longer has to prove puberty. The only thing that has to be proved is that the parties were married before attaining the age of 15 years and the right of option of puberty was exercised before attaining the age of 18 years.
In Usman v. Budhu, the Court rejected the argument raised by the accused that the effect of the legislation was to ‘allow a woman who has been given in marriage by her father before she attained the age of puberty to repudiate the marriage in the same way as if she had been given in marriage by her uncle’
RELEVANCE OF THIS CONCEPT
The option of puberty is a blanket remedy used to protect the minor from contracting them into marriages without their consent. Earlier, due to the extensive patriarchal authority, the consent of minors was not considered important and the guardians used to enter them into marriage on the minor’s behalf. Such marriages will be undesirable as the minor party will not have attained sufficient mental maturity or physical maturity to enter into a marriage or understand the concept of marriage. The minor, especially the girl, can be easily pressurised or forced to enter into marriage by fraud or undue influence and there was no opportunity available for the minor wife to repudiate or revoke the marriage upon reaching puberty. The concept of ‘option of puberty’ acts as a shield against the patriarchal society and allows the minor wife to repudiate her marriage upon reaching puberty.
The option of puberty is a right of the minor to repudiate the marriage entered into by their guardian. Earlier the consent of the parties was immaterial to solemnize the marriage and what mattered the most was the decision of the guardian, especially father and grandfather. The religion gave more power to patriarchy in deciding the marriage of their children. This particular concept of the option of puberty safeguards the minors, especially the girls, with their rights such as the right to equality, right to life with dignity as enshrined in the Constitution under Articles 14 and 21. Marriage is a decision which has a huge impact on personal life. A child who is immature physically and mentally is incompetent to cope up with this stage of life. The child marriage, especially in girls, will have a crippling effect in their overall growth. There are also chances that they might suffer domestic violence, sexual abuse and marital rape. Girls who marry early in life are less likely to be informed about reproductive health and complications. Pregnancy and childbirth continue to be the main reason for death among adolescent girls in our country. In our country, the validation of marriage is the solemnization of the religious ceremonies defined by the religion the party belongs to Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 prescribes 18 and 24 years as the age to marry for women and men respectively and the Muslim law prescribes the marriage age at which the parties attain the age of puberty. If a child is married before the age of puberty, then she won’t have enough mental capacity to give consent for such marriage or to decide what is best for her. The relevance of the concept of the option of puberty available to minor under section 13(2) (iv) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and section 2 (vii) of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 is immense as it allows the minor to repudiate the marriage which was entered into without their consent. As per the concept, the consummation of marriage before attaining the age of puberty is restricted so that it helps in preventing violence, especially against women such as marital rape etc. It also takes away the unnecessary power given to the guardian to contract the marriage of minors. This concept also has great importance in curbing child marriage, but it is not possible to completely protect the children from such illegal marriages. The previous law in our country, entitled the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929, had a provision to restrain but not prevention or prohibition of child marriage. The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 is proper prevention of child marriage and protection of children involved and prosecution of offenders etc. Despite having lots of laws against child marriage, it still exists in our society due to several reasons. Providing rights such as Option of puberty will help those children who were forced into marriage without their consent, to repudiate it.
Mutual consent of the parties to a marriage acts as a foundation stone in a marital relationship. According to all religious systems, it is crystal clear that the consent of the parties to the marriage is of prime importance. The consent of the parties should be free from any kind of coercion and should be out of the free will. But the majority of cases show that the consent of the minor is not taken into consideration and is not generally thought to be necessary and they were obliged to submit to the wishes of their guardians. This particular concept acts like a blanket or shield to protect the rights of the minors by providing them with an opportunity to repudiate the marriage which was accepted without their consent. But certain changes need to be made in the right of option of puberty and these changes need to directly come through legislation. Even though the court has regarded the option of puberty as a blanket remedy against any marriage that is contracted against the consent of the minor, its efficiency is questionable as most of the individuals are completely unaware of such provisions existing. Such unawareness about the provision defeats the very purpose of the right to option of puberty even though it is really useful.
- As per the Muslim law, the option of puberty can be exercised only after the age of 15 years and before attaining the age of majority. It’s not necessary that the minor would have reached sufficient mental capacity before attaining the age of majority to repudiate the marriage. Therefore, the age limit for exercising the option of puberty should be increased.
- Also, consummation should not be considered as an implied consent because the girl can be forced for such physical relationships or might have been done due to insufficient mental capacity to understand the act.
- According to section 13 (2) (IV), the option of puberty can be exercised only if the marriage was solemnized before attaining the age of 15 years. This specific mention of age is legalizing marriages after the age of 15 years when the actual age of marriage for Hindus remains 18 years for women and 21 years for men.
 Kawther M. Al-Minawi, A Segment of Woman rights in Islam, pp. no. 61 (2nd ed., Dar Ashibil Publishers & Printers, Saudi Arabia, 1993).
 Tanzeem Fathma, Marriage Contract in Islam, p.no 53 (1st ed., Deep & Deep Publishers, 2006).
 Sheikh Burhanuddin Abi Al Hasan Ali Marghinani (Charles Hamilton (Translate.)), The Hedaya- Commentary on the Islamic Laws, pp. no.53 (Kitab Bhavan, 1994).
 See: Supra note 3.
 Imam Muslim, (Hamid Abdul Siddiqui (Transl.)), Sahih Mualim, pp. no. 714, vol. 2 (Kitab Bhavan, 1998)
 Tanzeem Fathma, Marriage Contract in Islam, p.no 57 (1st ed., Deep & Deep Publishers, 2006).
 Mohammedan law, 6 (4) JILI, pp. no. 533-544, 1964.
 Syed Khalid Rashid (V.P Bhartiya (ed.)), Muslim Law, pp. no. 95 (4th ed., Eastern Book Company, 2009).
 There are four schools of sunni law, Hanafi ,maliki, shafi and hanbali. The majority of them are Hanafi and Shia.
 Ghulam Fatima v. Khaira, (1923) AIR Lahore 6740.
 See: Islam Awareness, Concept of Marriage in Islam, available at: http://www.islamawareness.net/Marriage/marriage_article001.html. (Retrieved on September 26, 2016).
 See: Shahul v. Allah Bachayo, (1916) 34 I.C. 504; See also: Hasan Bibi v. Fazal Elahi, (1929) AIR Lahore 804 (India).
 Muhammad Sharif v. Khuda Baksh, (1936) AIR Lahore 683 (India).
 Lucy Caroll, The Muslim Family in India, 23(2) JILI pp. no. 149-180 (1981).
 See: Shivali singh, Analysing the Concept of Khyar-ul-Bulugh, 2015; available at: https://www.academia.edu/12501508/Analysing_The_Concept_of_Khyar-ul-bulgh.
 See: Supra note 11.
 Hussaina v. Mst. Jiwani, (1924) AIR Lahore 385 (India).
 Bismillah Begam v. Nure Muhammad, (1922) AIR ALL 155 (India).
 See: Supra note 15, p.no 157.
 Ghulam Sakina v. Falak Sher, (1950) AIR Lahore 45.
 Muhammad Hussain vs. Meherban Hussain, (1958) 56 All.L.J 79 ¶ 92 (India).
 Mst. Ahmad-un-Nissa Begum v. Ali Akbur Shah (1942) 199 IC 531 (India).
 Muhammad Hussain vs. Meherban Hussain, (1958) 56 All.L.J 79 ¶ 92 (India).
 Faseela v. State of Kerala, (2013) 2 KLJ 651 (India).
 Dhanwantri, Sushtra, pp. vii, v (47,48).
 See: Supra note 28.
 Mst. Kalwani v. Deviram, (1961) AIR HP 1 (India).
 Kanti Devi v. Shri Ram Kalu, (1936) AIR Pun. (India) p.235.
 Premi v. Dayaram, (1965) AIR H.P. (India).
 Uma Shanker Prasad v. Smt. Radha, (1967) AIR Pat. 220 (India).
 Kanti Devi v. Shri Ram Kalu, (1936) AIR Pun. (India) p.235.
 Reeva Devi v. Mohinder Singh, 2003 1 SCR 820 (India).
 Roop Narayan v. Union of Indian, (2007) AIR Chh. 64 (India).
 Ramesh Kumar v. Sunila Devi, (2005) AIR P H 55 (India).
 Tahra Begum v. State of Delhi, (2013) 1 RCR (Civil) 798 (India).
 Musmmat Chirag Bibi v. Ghulam Sarwar, 60 Ind. Cas. 453 (Lahore).
 Mustafa v. Smt. Khursida, (2006) AIR Raj. 31 (India).
 Usmam v. Budhu, (1942) AIR Sindh 92 (India).