Maintenance Rights of Divorced Muslim Women (GS Paper 2, Government Policies)
Why in News?
- The Supreme Court of India, in the case of Mohd Abdul Samad v. the State of Telangana, 2024, dismissed a petition challenging the applicability of Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) to a divorced Muslim woman.
What was the Petition About?
- A Muslim man filed the petition challenging a direction to pay interim maintenance to his divorced wife under Section 125 CrPC.
- The petitioner argued that the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 should override the secular law of Section 125 CrPC.
- He claimed that the 1986 Act, being a special law, provided more comprehensive maintenance provisions and should take precedence over the general provisions of Section 125 CrPC.
- The petitioner emphasized that Sections 3 and 4 of the 1986 Act, with a non-obstante clause, empower First Class Magistrates to decide matters of Maher (mandatory gift given by the husband to his wife at the wedding) and subsistence allowances, arguing that family courts lack jurisdiction as the Act mandates Magistrates to handle these issues.
- The petitioner also noted the wife's failure to submit an affidavit opting for CrPC provisions over the 1986 Act, as required by Section 5.
- He argued that the 1986 Act implicitly repealed Section 125 CrPC for Muslim women due to its specific provisions, thus barring them from seeking relief under Section 125 CrPC.
What is the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986?
Purpose:
- The Act was enacted to protect the rights of Muslim women who have been divorced by, or have obtained divorce from, their husbands.
- It provides for matters connected with or incidental to the protection of these rights.
Context:
- The Act was a response to the Mohd. Ahmad Khan vs. Shah Bano Begum, 1985 case, in which the SC held that Section 125 of the CrPC is a secular provision applicable to all, irrespective of religion.
- The right to maintenance under CrPC is not negated by provisions of personal law.
Provisions:
- A divorced Muslim woman is entitled to a reasonable and fair provision and maintenance from her former husband, to be paid within the iddat period (a period, usually of three months, which a woman must observe after the death of her husband or a divorce before she can remarry).
- The Act also covers the payment of mahr (dower) and the return of properties given to the woman at the time of marriage.
- It allows a divorced woman and her former husband to choose to be governed by the provisions of sections 125 to 128 of the CrPC, 1973, if they make a joint or separate declaration to this effect at the first hearing of the application.
Evolution of Legal Provisions
- Danial Latifi & Another vs Union Of India (2001): The SC upheld the constitutional validity of the 1986 Act, stating that its provisions do not offend Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution of India. The ruling extended the right of Muslim women to receive maintenance beyond the iddat period until they remarry.
- Shabana Bano v. Imran Khan (2009): The SC reiterated that divorced Muslim women could claim maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC, even beyond the iddat period, as long as they do not remarry. This affirmed the principle that the CrPC provision applies irrespective of religion.
What Does Section 125 of the CrPC Say?
- Section 125 of the CrPC mandates that a Magistrate of the first class may order a person with sufficient means to make a monthly allowance for the maintenance of:
- His wife, if she is unable to maintain herself.
- His legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself.
- His legitimate or illegitimate adult child with physical or mental abnormalities or injuries that render them unable to maintain themselves.
- His father or mother, unable to maintain themselves.
Supreme Court Observations
- The SC held that Section 125 CrPC applies to all women, not just married women, and emphasized that the provision would apply universally.
- The SC's judgment reaffirms the rights of divorced Muslim women to claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, ensuring legal parity and safeguarding constitutional guarantees of equality and non-discrimination.
- The Court dismissed the appeal, reaffirming that Muslim women can seek maintenance under Section 125 CrPC despite the existence of the 1986 Act. The Court noted that Section 3 of the 1986 Act, starting with a non-obstante clause, does not restrict the application of Section 125 CrPC but rather provides an additional remedy.
- The Court affirmed that divorced Muslim women, including those divorced through triple talaq (now deemed illegal), can claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC irrespective of personal laws.
- Instant triple talaq, or talaq-e-bidat, is a practice within the Muslim community where a man can instantly divorce his wife by pronouncing "talaq" three times in one sitting, through phone, or even via text message. The divorce is immediate and irrevocable, regardless of the husband's later desire to reconcile. Triple talaq has been declared void by the SC and criminalized by the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019.
Conclusion
- The Supreme Court's dismissal of the petition in Mohd Abdul Samad v. the State of Telangana, 2024 upholds the principle that Section 125 of the CrPC applies universally, irrespective of personal laws.
- This ruling reinforces the rights of divorced Muslim women to seek maintenance under a secular provision, ensuring their financial security and upholding constitutional guarantees of equality and non-discrimination.
- The Court's decision highlights the judiciary's commitment to providing equal protection under the law for all women, regardless of religious background, and affirms the non-obstante nature of the 1986 Act as providing an additional, not exclusive, remedy for divorced Muslim women.
- This landmark judgment is a significant step towards gender justice and the protection of women's rights in India.
