Author: Yashi Srivastava, BA. LLB. (Hons.)
Sem-7, S.S.Khanna Girl’s Degree College
Case Name -Muhammad Ahmed Khan v Shah Bano Begum(1985)
Petitioner: Mohd. Ahmed Khan
Respondents: Shah Bano Begum & Ors.
Date of Judgment: 23 April 1985
Citation -AIR 1985 SC 945
Equivalent Citation: 1985 AIR 945, 1985 SCR (3) 844.Honorable Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Y. C. Chandrachud (CJ)
Rangath Misra, D. A. Desai, O. Chinnappa Reddy, E. S. Venkataramiah (JJ)
Facts
Muhammad Ahmed Khan was a lawyer . He married Shah Bano Begum in 1932. They had 3 sons and 2 daughters. In 1975 Shah Bano was disowned by her husband . She was removed from her marital home along with her children after he married a second wife . She was 62 years of age at that time. She demanded her rights for maintenance which was neglected by her husband. Then she went to the district court.
District court – Shah Bano filed a case in the court of judicial magistrate of Indore. She was not given the maintenance which was guaranteed to her by her husband ,of a sum of Rs. 200.
She demanded a maintenance for Rs. 500 from her husband. Her husband gave her triple talaq on 6th November 1978 and gave her a Mahr of Rs. 3000.He did so to prevent the payment of maintenance .The husband of Shah Bano argued that her claim for maintenance should be dismissed. It was said on the that she had already received the amount of her Mehr which was due according to Muslim personal laws.
The magistrate directed Muhammad Ahmed to pay Rs. 25 per month as maintenance to his wife Shah Bano.
High Court – The wife of Md. Ahmed who was not satisfied with the decision of the court made an appeal in the High of Madhya Pradesh . She did it to change the amount of maintenance from Rs. 25 per month to Rs. 179 per month.
The high court gave the judgement in her favor and increased the amount of maintenance payable to her to Rs. 179 per month.
This decision was challenged by Muhammad Ahmed Khan in the Supreme court as a special leave petition to the High Court’s decision.
Issues
Whether the definition of “Wife” includes a divorced Muslim woman under sec125 of Code of Criminal procedure?
Whether sec 125 of Code of Criminal procedure overrides the Muslim personal law ?
Whether a Muslim husband is under an obligation to pay maintenance to his divorced wife under sec 125 Crpc or it is in conflict with the Muslim personal law?
Supreme court Judgement
1. The Supreme Court held that Section 125 of the CrPC, which mandates that a husband must provide maintenance to his wife if she cannot support herself, applies to all citizens, irrespective of their religion. The court ruled that the provision is secular and is meant to prevent destitution and vagrancy among women, including divorced women.
2. The court rejected the argument that a Muslim husband’s obligation to provide maintenance ends after the iddat period (a period of three months following the divorce during which a Muslim woman cannot remarry). The judgment stated that if the divorced woman is unable to maintain herself after the iddat period, the husband is obliged to provide maintenance under Section 125.
3. The court observed that there is nothing in the Quran or Hadith (Islamic texts) that conflicts with the application of Section 125 to Muslims. It pointed out that Islamic law, as practiced in many other countries, does not preclude a divorced woman from seeking maintenance from her former husband. The court emphasized that Islam places a high value on ensuring that women are treated with respect and dignity.
4. The judgment underscored that the right to maintenance is rooted in the constitutional principles of equality (Article 14) and the right to live with dignity (Article 21). The court stated that denying a divorced Muslim woman maintenance would be inconsistent with these fundamental rights.
5.The judgment included an observation by the court that highlighted the need for a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in India, as envisaged by Article 44 of the Constitution. The court noted that a UCC would help in ensuring that laws are uniform across all communities, thereby promoting national integration and protecting the rights of women.
6. The judgment was met with significant backlash from conservative sections of the Muslim community, who felt that the ruling interfered with Islamic personal law. This led to widespread protests and eventually prompted the Indian government to enact the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, which diluted the effect of the Shah Bano judgment by restricting the rights of Muslim women to claim maintenance beyond the iddat period.
Cases Refereed
Fuzlunbi Versus K. Khader Vali and another [(1980) 4 S.C.C. 125]
Bai Tahira V. Ali Hussain Fissali Chothia & ANR. [(1979) 2 S.C.C. 316]
Nanak Chand V. Chandra Kishore Aggarwal & others [A.I.R. 1970 S.C. 446]
Mst.Jagir Kaur & ANR V. Jaswant Singh [A.I.R. 1963 S.C. 1521]
Hamira Bibi v. Zubaida Bibi [A.I.R. 1916 P.C. 46]
SyedSabir Husain v. Farzand Hasan [A.I.R. 1938 P.C. 80.]
Constitutional Reasoning
1. Secularism – The Court emphasized the secular nature of the Indian Constitution. It held that personal laws cannot supersede the constitutional guarantee of equality and the right to live with dignity.
2. Gender justice The judgment highlighted the need to protect the rights of women, especially in cases where personal laws may be inadequate or discriminatory. It was seen as a step toward ensuring gender justice by not leaving divorced women to the mercy of potentially unjust personal laws.
3. Social justice The decision also reflected the Court’s intent to promote social justice by ensuring that divorced women, irrespective of their religion, are not left destitute and without means of subsistence. Women are often treated inferior to men and they are not given there due respect and treatment. This must change and with this view judiciary came up with the judgement.
Aftermath and Controversy
The ruling sparked significant controversy, particularly among some sections of the Muslim community, who viewed it as an infringement on Islamic law (Sharia). The government, led by Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, faced immense pressure and eventually passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. This act effectively overturned the Shah Bano judgment by limiting the maintenance payable to a divorced Muslim woman to the period of iddat unless both parties agree otherwise.
FAQS
Does Muslim women have right to maintenance under Sec 125 Crpc?
Yes , not only Muslim women but women of any religion can claim right of maintenance under sec 125 Crpc .
Does Muslim women have right to maintenance under the Muslim personal law?
Yes Muslim men are obliged to maintain there wives . This obligation persists even if there is no agreement regarding this.
Long-Term Impact
The Shah Bano judgment remains a significant milestone in the fight for women’s rights in India. It brought to the forefront the tensions between personal law and the constitutional mandate for equality, sparking a national debate on the rights of Muslim women and the need for a Uniform Civil Code. Despite the subsequent legislation that curtailed its impact, the case is often cited as a key example of the judiciary’s role in advancing social justice and gender equality in India.
The right of women are often neglected and the society has a patriarchal mindset . To overcome these the judiciary often uses its judicial activism and judicial mind to come up with such landmark judgement which are referred in the forthcoming cases and become a stare decisis.
