Supreme Court Upholds Right of Divorced Muslim Women to Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC

Landmark Judgment Affirms Maintenance Obligation of Muslim Husbands Beyond Iddat Period, Emphasizes Secular Character of Maintenance Law Over Personal Law

In a historic verdict delivered on April 23, 1985, the Supreme Court of India, in the case of Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, has emphatically upheld the right of a divorced Muslim woman to claim maintenance from her husband under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). The judgment, delivered by a five-judge larger bench headed by Chief Justice Y.V. Chandrachud, clarified vital legal questions regarding the interplay between secular maintenance laws and Muslim personal law, placing the welfare of indigent divorced wives at the forefront.

The case arose when Shah Bano Begum, a divorced Muslim woman, sought maintenance from her husband, Mohd. Ahmed Khan, under Section 125 CrPC after being divorced by him through irrevocable talaq. The husband contended that under Muslim personal law, his obligation to maintain the wife ceased after the iddat period and that he had already paid maintenance during that time and the dower (mehr). He argued that Section 125 CrPC did not apply to divorced Muslim women beyond the iddat period.

The Supreme Court, after a detailed examination of the statutory provisions and Islamic texts, rejected the contention that Muslim personal law absolved a husband of maintenance liability beyond iddat if the divorced wife was unable to maintain herself. The Court held that:

1. Section 125 CrPC is Secular and Overriding: Section 125 is a secular provision aimed at preventing destitution and vagrancy and applies uniformly across all religions. The term “wife” under Section 125 includes a divorced woman who has not remarried, irrespective of the religion of the parties. Thus, divorced Muslim women are entitled to claim maintenance under the CrPC.

2. No Conflict Between Section 125 CrPC and Muslim Personal Law: The Court explained that Muslim personal law limits maintenance to the iddat period but does not contemplate situations where the divorced wife is unable to maintain herself after iddat. Section 125 fills this gap by providing a remedy to indigent divorced wives, thereby not conflicting with Muslim personal law but supplementing it.

3. Right to Refuse Cohabitation if Husband Marries Again: The Court pointed out the Explanation to Section 125(3) which allows a wife to refuse to live with her husband if he has contracted another marriage, highlighting the progressive nature of the statutory provision that overrides any conflicting personal law provisions.

4. Mehr is Not Maintenance Payable on Divorce: The Court clarified that mehr (dower), though payable on dissolution of marriage, is not an amount payable 'on divorce' in the sense contemplated by Section 127(3)(b) CrPC. Mehr is an obligation imposed as a mark of respect for the wife and is distinct from maintenance claims under the CrPC.

5. Quranic Injunctions Support Maintenance: The Court referred to Quranic verses (241 and 242 of Surah Al-Baqarah) which emphasize the duty of Muslim husbands to provide “provision” or maintenance to divorced wives, reinforcing the judgment’s alignment with Islamic principles.

6. Rejection of Arguments Against Maintenance: The Court dismissed extreme submissions by some interveners that Muslim divorced women should rely solely on family support, underscoring the State’s duty to ensure justice and social welfare.

7. Call for Uniform Civil Code: The judgment also lamented the non-implementation of Article 44 of the Constitution, which mandates the State to endeavor for a Uniform Civil Code, and urged the State to take legislative steps to harmonize personal laws for national integration and gender justice.

The Supreme Court dismissed the husband’s appeal and upheld the High Court’s order directing the payment of maintenance to Shah Bano Begum, quantifying the costs of the appeal at Rs. 10,000 in favor of the respondent.

This landmark verdict is widely regarded as a milestone in Indian jurisprudence on women’s rights, particularly Muslim women’s right to maintenance, reinforcing the principle that secular laws enacted for social welfare must prevail over personal laws when conflicts arise. The judgment has since inspired debates on personal law reforms and the need for a common civil code in India.

Statutory provisions

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Sections 125, 127(3)(b), Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 Section 2

Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, (SC) : Law Finder Doc Id # 47920