In Pakistan, a Suit for Jactitation of Marriage is a legal remedy available to individuals who are falsely claimed to be married by another person. It is particularly important in cases where such false claims can damage a person’s reputation, create legal complications, or affect their future marriage prospects.
This article explains the meaning, procedure, legal framework, and relevant case law regarding the suit for jactitation of marriage under Pakistani law.
What is Jactitation of Marriage?
The term “jactitation” comes from Latin, meaning “boasting” or “false claim.” In legal terms, jactitation of marriage refers to a situation where:
❝ One person falsely claims to be married to another, and the latter denies the marriage and seeks a court declaration that no such marriage exists. ❞
The purpose of filing a suit is to restrain the person from falsely claiming the marital relationship.
Legal Basis in Pakistani Law
There is no specific section titled “jactitation of marriage” in the statutory laws of Pakistan. However, such suits are maintainable under the Family Courts Act 1964 and civil declaratory law under:
- Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877:
“Any person entitled to any legal character… may institute a suit against any person denying or interested to deny his title to such character.”
- Family Courts Act 1964, read with:
- Schedule of matters within family courts’ jurisdiction, which includes “marriage and jactitation of marriage.”
Thus, a suit for jactitation of marriage can be filed before the Family Court as a declaration suit.
When Can You File a Suit for Jactitation of Marriage?
You may file this suit if:
- Someone falsely claims or spreads rumors that you are married to them;
- The claim has no legal basis, i.e., no valid Nikah/registration exists;
- The false claim affects your reputation, dignity, or legal standing;
- You want the court to officially declare that no such marriage exists.
Essential Elements of the Suit
To successfully file a suit for jactitation of marriage, the following must be established:
| Element | Explanation |
|---|---|
| False claim of marriage | The defendant is asserting that they are married to you. |
| Absence of actual marriage | There is no valid nikah or proof of marriage. |
| Harm to dignity/reputation | The false claim is damaging your social/legal standing. |
| Need for declaratory relief | You require a court declaration to stop the false claim. |
Procedure to File a Suit for Jactitation of Marriage
Step-by-Step Guide:
- Hire a Family Lawyer
Approach a lawyer experienced in family litigation. - Draft the Plaint (Lawsuit)
Include:
- Your personal details
- False claim details
- Denial of marriage
- Legal request for declaration and restraining order
- Attach Supporting Documents
- Affidavit
- Evidence showing the false claim (witnesses, messages, social media posts, etc.)
- CNIC copy
- File in the Family Court
Submit the case under Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act read with the Family Courts Act 1964. - Serve Notice to Defendant
The opposite party will be summoned by the court. - Present Evidence and Witnesses
Both sides will be allowed to prove or disprove the marriage claim. - Final Order / Declaration
If the court is satisfied that no marriage exists, it will issue a declaration that no marriage has taken place and restrain the defendant from claiming otherwise.
Consequences of False Claim of Marriage
- The court may issue a permanent injunction against the person falsely claiming marriage.
- The defendant may face defamation or criminal proceedings under:
- Section 182 PPC (giving false information)
- Section 499 PPC (defamation)
- Section 506 PPC (criminal intimidation), if threats were involved.
Relevant Judgments and Statutes
- Mst. NIGHAT AIJAZ versus MUHAMMAD JAMEEL, PLD 1994 Karachi 46: Clarifies the jurisdiction of Family Courts in cases of jactitation of marriage, especially when the marriage’s validity is contested due to fraud or forgery.
- Ghulam Haider versus Judge Family Court, 1998 CLC 972: Reinforces the principle that each party has the right to present their evidence, and a court cannot rely on evidence from a withdrawn case to decide the current matter.
- TAJOO versus Mst. SATTARAN, PLD 1974 Lahore 105: Clarifies that suits for jactitation of marriage fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of Family Courts in Pakistan.
- Rabia Akhter and another v. Muhammad Ayub and 2 others, 2013 MLD 16: Establishes that a suit for jactitation of marriage can be filed by either spouse and reinforces the exclusive jurisdiction of Family Courts in these matters.
- Mst. ZAKIA NAZAR versus TALLAT MAHMOOD, 1985 MLD 253: Emphasizes the convenience and safety considerations for women in legal proceedings and underscores the importance of consolidating related matrimonial disputes in one court.
- Mst. SAKINA AND 2 OTHERS v. NASIR ALI, PLD 1976 Quetta 97: Clarifies the jurisdiction of the Family Court and regular civil courts, specifying that suits between the alleged spouses fall under the Family Court’s jurisdiction.
- Ashiq Hussain v. Mst. Pathani and others, 1987 CLC 1705: Reaffirms the limited scope of constitutional jurisdiction in cases with concurrent findings of fact by lower courts.
- Muhammad Rafique v. Judge, Family Court Lahore and Another, PLD 1985 Lahore 613: Clarifies the scope of Section 23 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act and its effect on the application of res judicata in family law matters.
- Malik Shahid Mehmood versus Samina Yasmeen, 1989 P Cr. L J 1194: Ensures that civil disputes regarding the marital relationship are resolved before any final decision is made in related criminal proceedings.
- Mst. AMINA BEGUM- Petitioner versus GHULAM NABI AND 2 OTHERS-Respondents, PLD 1974 Lahore 78: Clarifies the scope of “jactitation of marriage,” affirming that it encompasses both affirmative and negative declarations regarding marital status.
- Wazirzada Versus Mst. Taj Bibi, 2009 CLC 850: Reinforces the principle that High Courts are generally disinclined to interfere with the decisions of lower family courts unless there is a clear jurisdictional error.
- Younus versus Mst. Nazeran and others, 1992 CLC 42: Reinforces the jurisdiction of Family Courts in suits for jactitation of marriage and clarifies the relationship between such suits and decrees for restitution of conjugal rights.
- Fahmeed Akhtar v. 1st Additional District Judge, Sanghar and others, 2022 MLD 1728: Emphasizes the importance of thorough investigation and consideration of all available evidence in family law cases.
- Mst. KISHWAR BIBI v. MUKHTAR AHMAD, 1987 CLC 744: Reinforces that related family law suits should be tried in the same court to prevent conflicting outcomes.
- Nazar Qasim versus Mst. Shaista Rarveen, 1979 CLC 462: Clarifies the jurisdiction of Family Courts in cases of jactitation of marriage, reinforcing that suits aimed at disproving a false claim of marriage fall under their exclusive purview.
- Riaz Versus Mst. Zainab Bibi and another, 1985 CLC 1229: Clarifies that the right to appeal in cases of jactitation of marriage remains valid under the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964.
- Ahmad Ali v. Mian Khadim Hussain and others, 2002 YLR 2254: Reinforces the principle that a party aggrieved by a family court’s decision can seek redress through alternate remedies.
- Mst. RAZIA SULTANA v. MUHAMMAD SALIM, 1986 CLC 864: Emphasizes the importance of considering the convenience and safety of female litigants in family law cases.
- DILDAR HUSSAIN alias DIBAR Versus JUDGE FAMILY COURT, SUB-DIVISIONAL COURTS, TEHSIL CHICHAWATNI and another, 2014 M L D 1388: Reinforces the limited applicability of the Civil Procedure Code to family suits, particularly concerning amendments to pleadings.
- Saeed Muhammad v. Judge Family Court and Others, 1984 CLC 908: Reinforces the authority and jurisdiction of Family Courts in matters of family law.
- Malik SAEED AHMAD–Petitioner Versus ADDI’T’IONAL DISTRICT JUDGE and others—Respondents, 2006 YLR 697: Judgment reinforces the principle that High Courts will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact by lower courts unless there is evidence of misreading or non-reading of evidence.
- Abdul Hameed v. Ghulam Sarwar, 1986 PCr.LJ 2174: Judgment reinforces the principle that when civil and criminal matters revolve around the same core issue the civil court should first determine the civil rights before criminal proceedings advance.
- Mohammad Sajid v. Additional District Judge and others, 2020 CLC 1178: Judgment reinforces the principle that the burden of proof lies on the party seeking to prove the genuineness of a document when its execution is denied.
- MUHAMMAD ASHIQ versus SALIM AKHTAR MALIK AND ANOTHER, 1980 PCRLJ 393: Judgment reinforces the importance of thorough evidence evaluation in family court cases, especially concerning the validity of marriages.
- Mumtaz Hussain v. Mst. Zaibun Nisa and another, 1999 CLC 594: Judgment highlights the importance of protecting women from forced marriages and upholding the integrity of legal proceedings in family law cases.
- NASRULLAH versus THE DISTRICT JUDGE, KHUSHAB and another, 2000 YLR 703: Judgment reaffirms the importance of adhering to the principles of Muhammadan Law, especially the requirements for valid marriage contracts, including the necessity of credible witnesses.
- MUHAMMAD ZAHID KHAN KHATTAK Versus JUDGE FAMILY COURT and others, 2014 CLC 1439: Judgment reinforces the jurisdiction of Family Courts in cases of jactitation of marriage, clarifying that even when the existence of the marriage is denied by one party, the Family Court retains the authority to adjudicate the dispute.
- Muhammad Ramzan v. Additional District Judge III, Bahawalpur and another, 1988 CLC 442: Judgment reinforces the principle that the exercise of constitutional jurisdiction is discretionary and regulated by the facts and circumstances of each case.
- Haider Ali alias Ashique v. Mst. Irfana and 3 others, 2009 MLD 1155: Judgment reinforces that discretionary relief in constitutional petitions is granted judiciously and that concurrent findings of lower courts are given due consideration unless there are compelling reasons to intervene.
- Mst. RAMZAN BIBI versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE and others, 1995 CLC 1506: Judgment reinforces the principle that civil courts must independently assess the validity of a Nikah based on the evidence presented before them, without undue reliance on judgments from criminal courts.
- Section 34, THE PARSI MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE ACT, 1936: Suits for judicial separation. Exact text: Any married person may sue for judicial separation on any of the grounds for which such person could have filed a suit for divorce, or on the ground that the defendant has been guilty of such cruelty to him or her or their children, or has used such personal violence, or has behaved in such a way as to render it in the judgment of the Court improper to compel him or her to live with the defendant.
Conclusion
Filing a Suit for Jactitation of Marriage in Pakistan is an important legal remedy for protecting your identity, reputation, and future rights. If someone falsely claims to be married to you, the Family Court can declare that no such marriage exists and prohibit that person from making such claims again.
With legal backing from the Specific Relief Act 1877 and Family Courts Act 1964, this suit is a powerful way to stop malicious claims and protect your legal standing.