MOHAMMAD AHMAD KHAN VS

 SHAH BANO BEGUM 

AIR 1985 SC 945

1. INTRODUCTION 

The landmark judgement made by the supreme court on 23 April 1985 dealt with the problem of Triple Talaq Verdict. This case was a mile stone in the struggle of Muslim women for their rights and freedom. Where the whole world stood in favour of Shah Bano’s  husband , she stuck to her fight for her rights and fought against the system of triple talaq of the male dominated society. Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code states about the who can claim for maintenance and it allows a wife to claim maintenance from her husband , but the main concern was if this section applied to the Muslim because they were governed by the Muslim Law. 

2. FACTS OF THE CASE 

The facts of the case are stated below: 

1. Shah Bano married Mohammad. Ahmad khan in 1932 who was a renowned lawyer in Indore and bored 3 sons and 2 daughters.
2. After 14 years of marriage her husband married another women as it was permitted by the Muslim Law and in 1975 , Ahmad disowned her and pushed her out of the matrimonial home with her children when she was 62 years.
3.  In 1978 Shah Bano filed a suit against her husband claiming a maintenance of Rs 200 per month and such was guaranteed by him. 
4. As per the Muslim law a women who is disowned by her husband can claim maintenance and includes a women who is not remarried. 
5. On Nov 1978 Ahmad pronounced the Triple talaq to his wife and divorced  and such pronouncement was irrevocable. 
6.  After the pronouncement he took shelter under the law stating that his wife was no more his legal wife and he was not entitled to pay her the maintenance.
7. The magistrate court directed the respondent to pay Rs 25 per month to the petitioner but in July 1908 , Shah Bano appealed the High Court of Madhya Pradesh to increase her maintenance amount to Rs 179.  
8. Being dissatisfied , she appealed `Supreme Court. 
9. Her husband safeguarded him by stating that he is not allowed to keep any contact with his divorced wife because such is a Haram as per Islamic law and therefore , he was not legally responsible to maintain his divorced wife. 

3. LEGAL ISSUE 

The legal issues that were considered under this case are: 

1. Whether the term WIFE defined under CPC section 125 include divorced Muslim women? 
2. If section 125 of CPC over rides personal law? 
3. If the Muslim husband is obliged to pay maintenance to his divorced wife as per the section 125 and personal law ?
4. Whether as per CPC 1974 , section 127(3)(b) what will be the amount payable on divorce and that Mehar or dower is not summed payable on divorce ? 

4. DECESION 

The Supreme Court upheld Shah Bano’s appeal and dismissed the respondent plea. C.J, Y.C Chandrachud provided the following judgment: 

1. The apex court held that section 125 (3) shall be applicable to all citizen irrespective of their religion, thus this section shall override the personal law in case there is any conflict between the two. 
2. It makes clear that there’s no strife between the provisions of Section 125 and those of the Muslim Personal Law on the address of the Muslim husband’s obligation to provide maintenance for a divorced wife who is incapable to maintain herself.
3. The Supreme Court held that the obligation of Muslim husband towards her divorced wife is restricted to the degree of Iddat period.
4. Where the wife doesn’t have sufficient means to maintain herself the husband will be subsequently obliged to pay maintenance. 
5. The court further held that Muslim Law was against humanity or was wrong because here a divorced wife was not in a condition to maintain herself.
6. The payment of Mehar doesn’t exempt the husband from his  duty to pay maintenance in case of divorce. 
7. The court finally held that even though the husband’s legal liability will come to an end if divorced wife is competent to maintain herself, but if the wife is not able to maintain herself after the Iddat period, she will be entitled to get maintenance or alimony under Section 125 of CrPC.

5. IMPACT 

The judgment passed by the court in this case was criticized by many Muslims as it conflicted with the Islamic rules. 

Therefore, the Parliament of India in 1986, (Congress govt.) decided to enact the Muslim women (Protection Of Rights Of Divorce) Act, 1986 with the object to protect the rights of the Muslim women . This Act invalidated the decision made by Supreme Court but made sure that a divorced Muslim women will be entitled to adequate and reasonable amount of maintenance till the Iddat period. When a divorced women maintains a child born by her anytime before or after the divorce, the husband is under legal obligation to provide a certain amount of maintenance for the child to a period of 2 years.

Thus, securing all possible ways to secure the rights of the women to claim maintenance after divorce as per the law and that such would not hurt the personal law.

6. CONCLUSION 

The verdict pronounced by the apex court in the landmark case had entrusted faith and trust on judiciary. This case is a classic example of prioritizing justice and equality over religion. This was a very bold and courageous decision made by the apex court and is one of the historical precedent to ensure Muslim women’s right to claim maintenance who are divorced and are not in the condition to earn and maintain themselves. Even though this judgment was nullified by the Muslim Women Act but it still maintained the real motive of protecting women’s right.