Supreme Court Upholds Divorced Muslim Women's Right to Maintenance Under CrPC

Divorced Muslim Women’s Right: The Supreme Court has reaffirmed the right of divorced Muslim women to seek maintenance under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), specifically Section 125. This ruling reasserts that, despite the existence of Muslim personal laws, divorced Muslim women can claim maintenance under secular law, sparking discussions on the legal history of Muslim women’s rights to maintenance.

Case Background and Ruling

A two-judge bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and George Masih dismissed an appeal by Mohd Abdul Samad, who challenged a family court order requiring him to pay ₹20,000 per month in maintenance to his ex-wife. The Telangana High Court had upheld the family court’s ruling, and the Supreme Court’s decision confirmed that Muslim women are entitled to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC, even if they were divorced under religious law.

Justice Nagarathna highlighted that Section 125 CrPC, a secular law, is rooted in the Indian Constitution’s principles of social justice. She explained that the provision seeks to protect the rights of destitute and disadvantaged women, including divorced women, aligning with Article 15(3) (which allows for special provisions for women) and Article 39(e) (which prevents citizens from economic hardship).

The Shah Bano Case – Divorced Muslim Women’s Right

The case builds on the legacy of the Shah Bano case from 1978, where Shah Bano Begum sought maintenance for herself and her five children under Section 125 CrPC after being divorced through “irrevocable talaq.” Her former husband argued that his responsibility under Muslim personal law was limited to providing maintenance during the iddat period, which typically lasts for three months.

In a landmark 1985 ruling, the Supreme Court held that the provisions of Section 125 CrPC applied regardless of religion. The court ruled that Shah Bano was entitled to maintenance beyond the iddat period if she could not support herself, a decision that faced political backlash from conservative Muslim groups.

Read more: Shah Bano Case

Enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986

Following the Shah Bano judgment, the government of Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi enacted the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (MWPRD Act). This law limited the financial obligations of a Muslim husband to the iddat period, after which the responsibility for the woman’s support was placed on her relatives or the State Wakf Board.

This Act was widely seen as a step back for Muslim women’s rights, as it effectively overturned the Shah Bano ruling. The legislation was criticized for placing Muslim women at a disadvantage compared to women of other religions.

The Danial Latifi Case: Challenging the 1986 Act

The MWPRD Act was subsequently challenged by Danial Latifi, Shah Bano’s lawyer, in the Supreme Court. Latifi argued that the Act violated the constitutional rights of Muslim women by discriminating against them based on religion, thus infringing on their rights to equality (Article 14) and dignity (Article 21).

In 2001, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the MWPRD Act but interpreted it in a way that protected Muslim women’s rights. The court ruled that under the Act, a Muslim husband must provide “a reasonable and fair provision and maintenance” within the iddat period, but the actual payment could extend beyond this period. The ruling ensured that the husband remains responsible for the woman’s financial support, even after the iddat period, unless she remarries.

Read more: A Landmark Case On Triple Talaq

Current Supreme Court Ruling: Maintenance Beyond Religious Law

In the recent case, the Supreme Court reiterated that Section 125 CrPC operates in addition to the MWPRD Act, not against it. The ruling clarified that the MWPRD Act does not bar a Muslim woman from seeking maintenance under CrPC. This position, first established in the Danial Latifi v. Union of India case, ensures that Muslim women can claim maintenance even beyond the iddat period.

Justice Nagarathna noted that Section 125 CrPC is a secular law designed to provide financial security for all women, regardless of religion. This social justice measure is crucial for protecting women from destitution and financial insecurity.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision reaffirms that Muslim women have the right to claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, even after being divorced under Muslim personal law. This ruling is a significant step in ensuring the financial security and dignity of divorced Muslim women, reinforcing the role of secular law in safeguarding their rights. The decision builds on a long history of legal battles, beginning with the Shah Bano case, and continues to challenge the intersection of personal and secular laws in India.

Read more: Abhaya Mudra – UPSC