pls clear my doubt

according what i know about islam marriage they say that a nikah is valid only when husband and wife indulge in intimate relation.

Originally posted by: rithika2015

according what i know about islam marriage they say that a nikah is valid only when husband and wife indulge in intimate relation.

if u go by that ruksar and kabir never had any intimate relation. and i guess that is why ruksar was desperate to have her so called HAQ i felt. she even intended to disturb zabir's first night saying that their talaq will end only after their first night which she decided to spoil.

now coming to ruksar and kabir's case. they dont have any relation as wife and husband and moreover kabir doesnt want any relation with her.

according to hindu marriage law if a partner is not willing to have physical relation with the other then they can be divorced easily. so does this apply to islam marriage also?

can anyone pls give info on this?

why cant kabir use this clause and get talaq from ruksar??

Here it's a little tricky . Although kabeer and ruksaar never consummated the marriage they were alone in an intimate setting where things could have happened if they wanted to. For this reason ruksaar would have to have iddah. If they were married and never lived together they wouldn't have to have a iddah period and he wouldn't be able to revoke it . If he were to change his mind in that case he would have to perform a new nikah with new mahr.

But here the marriage itself is questionable. They have to have a judgment on what to do with it as ruksaar believes she is married and demands her rites while kabeer now says it's not valid. If it is a valid nikah he can't refuse her the rites unless he to get talaq he can't keep her this way.

Originally posted by: Houstonmom

Here it's a little tricky . Although kabeer and ruksaar never consummated the marriage they were alone in an intimate setting where things could have happened if they wanted to. For this reason ruksaar would have to have iddah. If they were married and never lived together they wouldn't have to have a iddah period and he wouldn't be able to revoke it . If he were to change his mind in that case he would have to perform a new nikah with new mahr.

But here the marriage itself is questionable. They have to have a judgment on what to do with it as ruksaar believes she is married and demands her rites while kabeer now says it's not valid. If it is a valid nikah he can't refuse her the rites unless he to get talaq he can't keep her this way.

Originally posted by: rithika2015

so unless kabir proves that nikah is not valid ruksar claim his right on kabir. thats gonna really be painful for zara.

but here nikaah was done just to save her and he wud give talaq to her after saving her. so now he can give talaq to her right? so what is the issue.why cant he give talaq? even to give talaq does ruksar and kabir have to consummate their marriage?

Kabeer has to prove the nikah invalid or give her talaq. If he chooses to not do so she is legally untitled to rites of a wife he can't deny her that if she stays .
As for what he did to save her . He needs to go to shariah board convince them of what happened and get it annulled or voided . She has a marriage contract that proves her being his wife he can't simple walk away from it just denying he has to legally find a way out so it becomes unquestionable that he cut all ties and has no responsibilities towards her.

As to why he hasn't done anything about it . His being a selfish idiot has nothing to do with religion.
He holds the control of the relationship. He could have gotten rid of her the minute she was safe . But he got caught up in his selfishness and hiding the truth from Zara till she was stuck with him made his position weak and he now looks like a lieing cheater . Even ruksaar'a virtue will be questioned because of his keeping this secret. Regardless of her being horrible or not he hurt her reputation as a woman by hiding the marriage.

To give ruksaar talaq he doesn't have to consummate the marriage if he doesn't want too. Consummation is only considered because a woman may or maynor be pregnant. If a woman is pregnant she can't be devorced until she delivers the baby.

Fro.m what i have heard ( i cant seem to find any evidence ) but if a married couple has not ever had sexual relations, within a 40 day period, a divorce can happen on the basis of that. Since it shows that neither couple is interested in maintaining a relationship with each other. Unless ofcourse they had a discussion before that heyy we want to get to know each other well bfr we move to the physical step, if there is understanding like that then no divorce..but coming baxk to the point, I've heard that divorces can easily/automatically happen if they didnt have physical relations within a 40day period

The right to divorce lies with the man in Islam so Kabir can use it irrespective of nikah, intimacy and so on. Important is does Kabir have the guts to divorce Rukhsar? He could do it with Zara. Here he is developing cold feet. The makers want to shove Rukh down on viewers, Ekta gets TRPs from this so may be they are doing the same.