Trace Your Case

Categories
Maintenance Under Hindu and Muslim law

Mohd. Ahmed Khan v, Shah Bano Begum, AIR 1985 SC 945

ISSUE:

Whether a “wife” in the CrPC included a divorced Muslim woman.

Whether Section 125 of the CrPC overrides Muslim personal law.

Whether a conflict exists between the payment of maintenance upon a divorce under Section 125 of the CrPC and Muslim personal law.

Whether the sum payable on the divorce of a Muslim marriage is limited to the period of iddah.

RULE:

Clause (b) of Section 125 contains no words of limitation to exclude Muslim women from its scope, it is secular in character.

A divorced Muslim woman is a wife under Section 125 of the CrPC so long as she has not remarried. The statutory rights granted to her are unaffected by personal law.

Muslim personal law (limiting the husband’s liability to the period of iddah) does not contemplate a case where the wife is unable to maintain herself. The true provision is that a husband’s liability only ceases at the end of the period of iddah so long as the wife is able to maintain herself.

Subscribe to Read More.
Login Join Now
Categories
Maintenance Under Hindu and Muslim law

Danial Latifi v. Union of India (2001) 7 SCC 740

ISSUE:

Whether the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act of 1986 is constitutionally valid?

RULE:

A careful reading of the Act would indicate that a divorced woman is entitled to a reasonable and fair provision of maintenance.

A divorced Muslim woman who has not remarried can proceed under Section 4 of the Act against her relatives who are liable to maintain her in accordance with Muslim law, should the relatives be unable to maintain the woman, a Magistrate may direct the State Waqf board to pay such maintenance.

Subscribe to Read More.
Login Join Now
Categories
Maintenance Under Hindu and Muslim law

Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan, 2015 SCC OnLine SC 288

ISSUE:

Whether Farooqui can claim maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC?

What is the sum of maintenance payable to Farooqui?

RULE:

The court referred to Shamim Bano v Asraf Khan [(2014) 12 SCC 636], Danial Latifi v Union of India [(2001) 7 SCC 740], Khatoon Nisa v State of UP [(2014) 12 SCC 646] and Shabana Bano v Imran Khan [(2010) 1 SCC 666] as binding precedent for the first issue.

The reduction of the High Court was without reason and makes it extremely difficult for Farooqui to live alone; Section 125 allows for enough maintenance for the wife to sustain herself.

Subscribe to Read More.
Login Join Now