_edited_edited.jpg)
Case Name - Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum
Case Citation - AIR 1985 SC 945
Parties Involved -
Appellant - Mohd. Ahmed Khan
Respondent - Shah Bano Begum
Bench -
Hon'ble Chief Justice Chandrachud
Justice Ranganath Misra
Justice D.A. Desai
Justice O Chinnappa Reddy
Justice E.S Venkatramiah
Relevant Acts and Sections -
Facts of the Case
In 1932, Shah Bano had married Mohd. Ahmad Khan, a former well-known lawyer in Indore.
They became the parents of 3 sons and 2 daughters which means that together they have 5 children.
After 14 years in their marriage, Shah Bano's husband married another younger woman.
In 1975, when Shah Bano was 62 years old, she was rejected by her husband and banished from her marital home with her children.
In April 1978, she filed a complaint under Sec. 125 of the criminal code, 1973 (CrPC) before the Indore magistrate's court after she was thrown out of her marital home by her husband.
Shah Bano filed this suit in 1978 because her husband promised to send Rs. 200 per month for her maintenance.
A wife who has no money and is neglected by her husband is entitled to maintenance, including a divorced and unmarried divorced woman.
In November 1978, he granted his wife Shah Bano a divorce by explaining or naming "Triple Talaq' and it would not be reversed.
An argument or dispute between the children of Shah Bano and another wife of her husband was the main reason why the divorce was released and granted.
After pronouncing Talaq Triple as unchanging, he took the protection that as a result of this divorce she was terminated as his legal wife, and as a result, he was not obliged to give her any maintenance money.
The local court (magistrate) ordered Mohd. Ahmad to give Rs. 25 a month to Shah Bano in the form of maintenance.
Shah Bano in July 1908, apart from this, applied to the M.P High Court, to change the amount of maintenance to Rs. 179 every month, after which this precedent got sent to the Supreme Court.
The main argument f the husband was that he cannot keep any contact with his previous wife because it is termed as "Haram" in his personal laws. Thus, he is not liable to pay any maintenance money to his ex-wife.
Issue of the Case
Whether Section 125 of the Code Of Criminal Procedure applies to Muslims?
Whether the Mehr amount provided by the husband through a divorce is sufficient to remove the husband's liability of maintenance?
Whether the Uniform Civil Code applies to all religions?
Judgment of the Case
All Indians Muslim Personal Law Board and Jamiat Lema-e-Hind were two Muslim organizations involved in the intervention case.
On 3 Feb 1981, the Supreme Court ruled in our favor and rejected Mohd Ahmad Khan's appeal and then confirmed the decision of the High Court.
The court states that Section 125 of the Code Of Criminal Procedure also applies to Muslims, without discrimination.
The Supreme Court, in this case, has rightly held that since the burden of a Muslim man on his divorced wife is limited to the "Iddat" period, even if this situation does not reflect the legal code referred to in Section 125 of CrPC., 1973
According to the Supreme Court, this law (Muslim personal law) was against humanity or was wrong because here the divorced woman was not in a position to take care of herself.
So finally, after a long court process, it was finally concluded that the husband's legal debt will end if the divorced wife is able to support herself.
However, this situation will be reversed in the event that the wife is unable to earn a living or support after the Iddat period, she will be entitled to maintenance or maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC.
The ruling in the Shah Bano case was criticized by Muslims and according to them the ruling violated the rules of "Quran" and "Islamic Laws / Islam". As a result, the Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights Of Divorce) Act, 1986 was enacted by the Indian Parliament (Congress government) in 1986. The primary goal of this legislation was to preserve the rights of divorced Muslim women and those who have divorced their husbands.
The action was taken by the government of Rajiv Gandhi, to discard the decision/declaration issued by the Supreme Court in the case of Shah Bano Begum. According to the law, divorced Muslim women should be allowed to receive adequate and reasonable maintenance until the time of Iddat. When divorced women keep the child born to her at any time before or after the divorce, the husband is legally obliged to provide a certain amount of child support for a period of two years. From the date of birth of the child. Women are also authorized to acquire "Mahr" or "dower" and to return all property or inheritance given to her by her parents, friends, relatives, friends of the husband or husband. If such benefits are not available to Muslim women who are divorced from their ex-husband, they can apply to the magistrate to order her to grant her maintenance/maintenance amount or the amount of "Mahr" or dowry or her estate or property.
Key Analysis
In the case of Mohd. Ahmad Khan V / S Shah Bano Begum, the Supreme Court has made it clear that Triple Talaq cannot take away the maintenance of divorced Muslim women who are unable to support themselves and her children when she is rejected or divorced by her husband. . The decision by Shah Bano in the Supreme Court was met with widespread criticism. At that time Muslim women who were newly married or unmarried could not be granted freedom even when the denial of their basic, anti-human, and fundamental freedoms violated fundamental human rights. Muslim women were returning to the status quo compared to other women in the world. They were illiterate and dependent compared to other women. They have faced major challenges and problems that have led to a decline in their confidence and knowledge in various groups. In line with these things, they were not allowed to learn or teach and were forbidden to work. Since they had to deal with all these things from an early age it was natural that during their difficult time (divorce or separation) they could not earn a living and be able to support themselves so for them, maintenance or maintenance money was very much needed.
The Shah Bano case was a normal case, similar to other maintenance cases that had occurred, and the Supreme Court's verdict was also similar to previous lawsuits, but the two naked truths that were witnessed in this case made it a landmark judgment case, and the two naked truths were- first, the spirituality of religious personal laws were criticized, and then it was questioned whether the Uniform Civil Code was applied to all the religions, and secondly whether the provisions of CrPC was applicable to Muslims too.
Similar Cases
For a more simple understanding, refer to the article " Is The Uniform Civil Code Applicable In India?" by clicking the button below.
Comments