Supreme Court of India Petitioner MOHD. AHMED KHAN Respondent SHAH BANO BEGUM Date of Judgement 23/04/1985 Bench Chandrachud, Y.V. ((Cj), Desai, D.A., Reddy, O. Chinnappa (J), Venkataramiah, E.S. (J), Misra Rangnath
Facts
Ms. Shah Bano Begum was married to a lawyer named Mr. Mohd. Ahmed Khan. They lived together for 43 years and had five children. In 1978, Mr. Khan threw Ms. Begum out of the shared household and Ms. Begum applied for maintenance from Mr. Khan under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C, 1973). Pending her application, Mr. Khan dissolved the marriage by pronouncing a triple talaq (divorce on the triple utterance of the word “talaq” by a Muslim husband) and paid Ms. Begum 3000 rupees as mahr (money/valuable property promised to a Muslim woman for her financial security under the marriage contract) and a further sum of maintenance for the iddat period (a period of 3 months that a Muslim woman has to observe before she can remarry after her divorce).
Mr. Khan argued that Ms. Begum’s claim for maintenance should be dismissed as Ms. Begum had received the amount due to her on divorce under the Muslim personal law. The lower court granted Ms. Begum’s claim for maintenance, which was set at 179 rupees per month by the High Court in a revision application. Mr. Khan appealed to the Supreme Court in 1985 and the Court held that a payment made pursuant to personal laws cannot absolve a husband of his obligation to pay fair and reasonable maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C, 1973 and a husband can be liable to pay maintenance beyond the iddat period.
Issues
- Whether the Code of Criminal Procedure particularly section 125 affects Muslims?
Judgment
The court held that the law is not limited by religion or the triple talaq. As such, section 125 is applicable to everyone. The Magistrate court held she should maintain for Rs. 25 monthly. On appeal, the Supreme Court held for Rs. 179 monthly.
Conclusion
It was a triple talaq verdict which according to me was a historic verdict as it upholds the truth and faith of the people in the judiciary because in this case, “justice and equality have transcended religion”. According to me, the trial was a milestone in the judiciary as it was a bold, bold, fair and unique decision. This decision has marked the importance of maintenance that should be provided to divorced Muslim women who are not in a position to earn and maintain themselves. Despite the Supreme Court’s decision of the Shah Bano case to be invalidated by the endorsement of the Muslim Women Act, the court further ruled that Muslims are divorced.
Under Section 125 of the CrPC, women can confirm maintenance or alimony from their ex-husband, or in addition divorced Muslim women can claim or claim for some money or amount under the Muslim Women Act. The Supreme Court may have given a decision after dirty politics which was fair and in the end it upheld the trust and confidence of the citizens in the judiciary.
