Font size:
Print
Divorced Muslim Woman’s Right To Maintenance
Context: The Supreme Court dismissed a Muslim man’s appeal against a Telangana High Court ruling, which permitted his ex-wife to seek maintenance under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC).
Supreme Court Ruling on Maintenance for Muslim Women:
- The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by Mohd Abdul Samad against a Telangana High Court order allowing his ex-wife to seek maintenance under the CrPC.
- The two-judge Bench comprised Justices B V Nagarathna and George Masih.
Key Points:
- A Muslim woman can seek maintenance from her husband under Section 125 of the CrPC, even if divorced under religious personal law.
- Section 125 CrPC is a secular legislation and ensures maintenance for wives, including divorced women who have not remarried.
- The ruling follows a 22-year-old precedent and reiterates social justice principles embedded in the Constitution.
Case Background:
- Mohd Abdul Samad challenged a 2017 family court order to pay Rs 20,000 per month to his ex-wife.
- The Telangana High Court upheld the family court’s decision.
Section 125 CrPC:
- Obligates a person with sufficient means to maintain his wife or children if they are unable to maintain themselves.
- Includes divorced women who have not remarried under the definition of “wife.”
Justice Nagarathna’s Opinion:
- Section 125 CrPC is rooted in the Constitution’s social justice measures.
- Maintenance is crucial for the destitute, deserted, and deprived women, aligning with Article 15(3) and Article 39(e) of the Constitution.
- The provision liberates women from gender-based discrimination and deprivation.
Justice Masih’s Opinion:
- Section 125 CrPC is a measure for social justice, protecting weaker sections regardless of personal laws.
- The right to seek maintenance under Section 125 exists during marriage and is not contingent on divorce.
- Excluding Section 125 from divorced Muslim women would violate Article 15(1) of the Constitution.
Relation to Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act,
(MWPRD Act), 1986:
- Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC is in addition to the MWPRD Act, not against it.
- The 1986 Act does not bar a divorced Muslim woman from claiming maintenance under Section 125.
Historical Context – Shah Bano Case:
- Shah Bano Begum sought maintenance under Section 125 CrPC in 1978 after divorce.
- Supreme Court upheld her right to maintenance beyond the iddat period.
- Parliament enacted the MWPRD Act in 1986 to overturn this verdict.
Challenge to MWPRD Act:
- Danial Latifi and Nafess Ahmad Siddiqui challenged the MWPRD Act’s constitutionality.
- Supreme Court upheld the Act but interpreted it to mean husbands must provide for future needs beyond the iddat period.
- He argued that Section 125 is intended to protect women of all religions from “destitution or vagrancy.”
- He claimed that the MWPRD Act discriminates against Muslim women, violating their right to equality (Article 14) and right to life with dignity (Article 21).
Summary:
- Section 125 CrPC ensures maintenance for wives, including divorced women, protecting them from destitution.
- The provision aligns with constitutional commitments to social justice and gender equality, transcending religious barriers.
