On July 10, 2023, the Supreme Court of India delivered a pivotal judgement affirming that a Muslim woman can seek maintenance from her husband under both Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. This decision addresses the intersection of personal laws and the rights of women in India.
Context and Background
- Historical Significance
- Shah Bano Case (1985): This landmark ruling established that Section 125 of the CrPC applies to all citizens, ensuring maintenance rights regardless of religion. However, it ignited a political controversy that led to the enactment of the 1986 Act.
- 1986 Amendment: In response to the Shah Bano judgement, the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi's government passed the Muslim Women Act, which limited maintenance claims to the 'iddat' period following a divorce.
- Current Legal Landscape
- The Supreme Court was asked to resolve the conflicts between a Muslim woman’s rights under Section 125 and the provisions of the 1986 law, leading to this significant ruling.
Details of the Case
- The couple married in November 2012, after which they faced marital issues leading the wife to leave in April 2016. Leading to a series of legal disputes, which included the charges of cruelty against the husband, the husband pronounced triple talaq in September 2017.
- Afterwards the wife sought maintenance under Section 125 of CrPC after she had rejected an interim offer of Rs 15,000 for 'iddat' period. The family court allowed for a maintenance of Rs 20,000 per month.
- The decision of the family court was challenged in High Court by the husband, where the decision of the Family Court was upheld, however the amount to be paid as maintenance was lowered.
- After which the husband approached the Supreme Court, arguing that the provision of Section 125 should not apply due to the 1986 Act.
Supreme Court's Findings
- It was confirmed by the Supreme Court both Section 125 and the 1986 Act are applicable to Muslim women, providing them with the option of seeking remedies under either or both laws.
- The ruling emphasised that if a husband has fulfilled his obligations under the 1986 Act or customary law, a divorced Muslim woman can still invoke Section 125 if she is unable to maintain herself.
- Justice B.V. Nagarathna stressed about the vulnerability of married women lacking independent income of their own, stating that maintenance is necessary for gender equality and shall not be treated as charity.
- Justice Augustine George Masih, during the hearing described Section 125 as a tool for social justice, which is applicable to all married women and aims to prevent destitution.
- It was indicated by Justice Masih that the 1986 law was not intended to restrict a divorced Muslim woman's rights solely with the 'iddat' period but had the intention to ensure an ongoing support. Section 3 of the 1986 Act provides for the entitlement of divorced women for fair provision, while Section 125 of the CrPC requires proof of inability to maintain oneself.
- Parallel Existence of Laws- It was emphasised in the decision that both Section 125 and the 1986 Act coexist, serving different purposes. Section 125 of the CrPC could be invoked during marriage or after divorce, while Section 3 of the 1986 Act is provided for the divorced women.
- Potential Conflicts- The Supreme Court also addressed the situations where a husband has fulfilled his obligations under Section 3 of the 1986 Act. In such cases, he could seek cancellation of the maintenance order under Section 125 if it could be shown that the woman is capable of supporting herself.
Decision of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's judgement, reiterating the applicability of Section 125 to divorced Muslim women despite the enactment of the 1986 Act.
Receive specialised guidance tailored to your divorce needs from Sharks of Law, also access personalised advice from the comfort of your home by accessing free Legal Consultation Online by contacting us at Sharks of Law.
Legal Implications of the Ruling
- The court clarified that if a Muslim woman is married and later gets divorced under the Muslim law, both Section 125 and the provisions of the 1986 Act apply simultaneously.
- In instances of an illegal divorce under the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, which prohibits triple talaq, women are entitled to seek relief under both Section 5 of the 2019 Act and Section 125 of the CrPC.
- If a divorced woman initially seeks maintenance under Section 125 and later claims under the 1986 Act, she can do so without losing her right to maintenance under Section 125.
- The husband must demonstrate that he has met his obligations under customary laws to contest the maintenance claim.
Conclusion
The ruling of the Supreme Court is a landmark affirmation to the rights of Muslim women in India, which has highlighted the need for legal frameworks supporting the vulnerable individuals, especially in matters related to maintenance and financial security.
The present judgement is expected to shape the future legal discourse related to maintenance rights, promoting gender equality as well as reinforcing the significance of the fundamental rights which have been guaranteed by the Constitution of India. The ruling serves as a critical step ensuring that personal laws shall not infringe upon the rights of women in India.
Appointing divorce lawyers from Sharks of Law ensures expert legal guidance, personalised support, as well as effective representation both in the Court as well as outside it. Our experienced teams deal with complex divorce proceedings, protecting the rights and interests of the clients, while striving for the best possible outcomes in a challenging time.
Email:-helpdesk@sharksoflaw.com
Help Desk:-+91-88770-01993
