{"id":304191,"date":"2024-07-12T19:00:48","date_gmt":"2024-07-12T13:30:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/?p=304191"},"modified":"2024-07-12T18:53:11","modified_gmt":"2024-07-12T13:23:11","slug":"sc-verdict-on-right-to-maintenance-of-muslim-women-explained-pointwise","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/sc-verdict-on-right-to-maintenance-of-muslim-women-explained-pointwise\/","title":{"rendered":"SC verdict on right to maintenance of Muslim Women- Explained Pointwise"},"content":{"rendered":"

In a landmark judgment<\/span> on the right to maintenance of Muslim Women, the Supreme Court (SC) bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Augustine George Masih has held that a divorced Muslim woman<\/span> can seek alimony<\/span> from her husband under Section 125<\/span> of the Code of Criminal Code<\/span> (CrPc). The court held that Section 125 of CrPC is a “religion neutral<\/span>” provision that applies to all married women, including Muslims.<\/p>\n

Post the enaction of The Muslim Women<\/span> (Protection of Rights on Divorce<\/span>) Act 1986<\/span>, which provided maintenance rights to Muslim women during the Iddat Period<\/span>, there has always been an ambiguity<\/span>, on whether the Muslim Women could seek remedy under Section 125 of the CrPC<\/span>. Several High Court judgments took different views on whether Muslim women should avail of Section 3 of the 1986 Act<\/span> or Section 125 of CrPC<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Now the verdict settles this question<\/span> by holding that the codification<\/span> of a Muslim woman\u2019s maintenance rights<\/span> in the 1986 Act, was only in addition to and not in derogation<\/span> of her right to seek maintenance like a woman<\/span> of any other religion,<\/span>\u00a0provided under Section 125 of the CrPC.<\/p>\n

\"Right
Source- The Hindu<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n\n
Table of Content<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
What is the historical background of the evolution of laws on Muslim Women’s right to maintenance?<\/a>
\nWhat are the four main pillars of the SC Verdict?<\/a>
\nWhat is the Significance of the Verdict?<\/a>
\nConclusion<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

<\/a>What is the historical background of the evolution of laws on Muslim Women’s right to maintenance?\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
1973<\/strong><\/td>\nSection 125 of the CrPC<\/span> codified the laws governing maintenance<\/span> for destitute wives, children, and parents. It holds that a divorced woman<\/span> has the right to seek maintenance\/monthly allowance from her husband until her remarriage.
\nIt is a religion neutral provision<\/span> which was universally applicable to all women belonging from different religions.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1985<\/strong><\/td>\nIn the famous Shah Bano case, Supreme Court<\/span> (SC) upheld a Muslim woman\u2019s right to seek maintenance<\/span> from her divorced husband under Section 125 of the CrPC<\/span>. The verdict was<\/span> perceived by many to be an affront to religious personal laws<\/span>.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1986<\/strong><\/td>\nThe Muslim Women<\/span> (Protection of Rights on Divorce<\/span>) Act,<\/span> 1986<\/span> was enacted to overturn the<\/span> SC verdict<\/span> in the Shah Bano Case<\/span>. It is a religion-specific law<\/span> that provides for a procedure for a Muslim woman to claim maintenance during divorce.
\nSection 3 of the Act<\/strong>
\na. Period of maintenance-<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0Section 3 of the Act<\/span> guarantees the payment of maintenance to a divorced Muslim woman<\/span> by her former husband. However, the maintenance will be provided during the period of iddat<\/em><\/span>. (It is a period, usually of three months<\/span>, which a woman must observe after the death of her husband or a divorce before she can remarry).
\nb. Maintenance Amount-<\/strong> The maintenance amount<\/span> shall be equal to the amount of mahr<\/em> or dowry<\/span> given to her at the time of her marriage or any time after that.
\nc. Recourse after the end of Iddat Period-<\/strong> After the completion of the Iddat period, a woman can approach a first-class magistrate for maintenance in case she has not remarried<\/span> and is not in a position to take care of herself financially.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2001<\/strong><\/td>\nIn the Danial Latifi v. Union Of India<\/span> (2001<\/span>) case, the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the 1986 Act<\/span>. It, however, reduced the period of maintenance<\/span> to the completion of iddat<\/span>.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2009<\/strong><\/td>\nIn the Shabana Bano v. Imran Khan, SC division bench <\/span>reiterated<\/span> a divorced Muslim woman\u2019s right to claim maintenance<\/span> under Section 125 of the CrPC until her remarriage<\/span>. It further highlighted that such a relief would be extended<\/span> even after the expiry of the iddat period<\/span><\/em>.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2019<\/strong><\/td>\nPatna HC’s verdict underscored that a divorced Muslim woman has the\u00a0option to avail of maintenance both under the CrPC and the 1986 Act.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Case Question-<\/strong> There prevailed an ambiguity<\/span> whether Muslim Women could claim maintenance rights<\/span> under Section 125 of the CrPC<\/span>, after claiming their rights under Section 3 of of the Muslim Woman’s<\/span> (Protection of rights on Divorce) Act, 1986.<\/p>\n

SC Verdict-<\/strong><\/p>\n

a. The Muslim Women can claim remedy under Section 125 of the CrPC<\/span>, despite claiming<\/span> the remedies<\/span> provided under Section 3 of the Muslim Woman’s<\/span> (Protection of rights on Divorce<\/span>) Act<\/span>, 1986<\/span>.<\/p>\n

b. The SC held that a Muslim woman\u2019s right to claim maintenance under criminal law<\/span> (CrPC) cannot be extinguished even if she has claimed her rights in personal law<\/span> (Muslim Women’ Protection of Rights on Divorce Act, 1986).<\/p>\n

c. A parallel remedy<\/span> in law that applies universally<\/span> (CrPC) cannot be taken away<\/span> by religious custom<\/span> despite the latter being codified as legislation.<\/p>\n

<\/a>What are the four main pillars of the SC Verdict?<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n

1. Social justice measure must be insulated from applicable personal laws-<\/strong> The SC held that Section 125 of CrPC<\/span> was introduced as a measure of social justice<\/span> to protect women and children. The provision manifested the constitutional commitment<\/span> of social justice<\/span> under Article 15<\/span>(3<\/span>) , which provided for special measures to ensure a life of dignity for women at all stages of their lives.<\/p>\n

A claim under Section 125 CrPC<\/span> is maintainable<\/span>, irrespective<\/span> of the applicable personal laws of the parties<\/span>.<\/p>\n

2. Equivalent rights of maintenance-<\/strong> The SC held that both- the secular provision<\/span> of Section 125 of the CrPC<\/span> and the personal law provision<\/span> of Section 3 of the 1986 Act– provide equivalent rights of maintenance in their distinct domains. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

The SC held that passage of the 1986 Act did not ‘militate against or dilute<\/span>‘ relief under Section 125 of the CrPC. The intent of the Parliament behind the 1986 Act was to provide an additional remedy for divorced Muslim women<\/span>.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

3. Harmonious Interpretation-<\/strong> The SC has held that the two conflicting statutes<\/span> should be harmoniously<\/span> and purposively interpreted<\/span>. SC has held that a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to seek recourse to either or both the provisions.<\/p>\n

The choice lies<\/span> with the Muslim woman<\/span> to apply for maintenance<\/span> either under Section 125 of the CrPC<\/span> or the 1986 Act<\/span>. If the woman is unable to provide for herself, she can seek remedy under Section 125 of the CrPC. If she is financially independent, she can seek maintenance under the 1986 Act<\/span> till the expiry of the iddat period.<\/p>\n

4. Muslim women divorced through triple talaq entitled to relief-<\/strong> The SC has held that Muslim women who have been divorced through illegal methods<\/span> such as triple talaq<\/span> are entitled to maintenance under Section 125<\/span> of the CrPC<\/span>.<\/p>\n

<\/a>What is the Significance of the Verdict on Muslim Women right to maintenance?<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n

The Supreme Court’s recent verdict affirming a divorced Muslim woman’s right to seek maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, irrespective of her religion, is likely to have several significant implications for the future of personal laws in India-<\/p>\n

1. Primacy of Secular Law over Personal Law-<\/strong> The judgment has firmly established that the ‘religion neutral<\/span>‘ provisions of secular law<\/span> take precedence<\/span> over personal law provisions<\/span>. The verdict reaffirms the supremacy of the Constitution<\/span> and secular law<\/span> in matters of gender equality<\/span>, overriding restrictive personal law interpretations<\/span>.<\/p>\n

2. Maintenance as a Right and not a Charity-<\/strong> The court has framed maintenance as a ‘facet of gender parity and enabler of equality<\/span>, and not charity<\/span>‘ for all married women, which includes Muslim women. This shift in perspective<\/span> from maintenance being a religious obligation<\/span> to a legal right<\/span> can have far-reaching consequences.<\/p>\n

3. Benchmark for challenging Discriminatory practices in other Laws-<\/strong> The verdict can serve as a precedent<\/span> for challenging discriminatory practices<\/span> in other personal laws<\/span>, such as the Hindu Succession Act<\/span>, Christian personal laws<\/span>, and Parsi personal laws<\/span>. This may lead to more reforms<\/span> to align personal laws<\/span> with constitutional principles of equality<\/span>.<\/p>\n

4. Upholding the Constitutional Values-<\/strong> The verdict protects the spirit of the Constitution and its promise of equality<\/span>, guaranteed by Article 14<\/span>.\u00a0It further protects the emboldens the value of social Justice for women provided by Article<\/span> 15<\/span> (1), Article 15<\/span> (3) and Article<\/span> 39<\/span> (e) of the Constitution.<\/p>\n

5. Socio-economic safety net to women-<\/strong> The verdict offers a socio-economic safety net to married women who often sacrifice employment opportunities<\/span> to nurture the family<\/span>, pursue child rearing<\/span>, and undertake care work for the elderly<\/span>.<\/p>\n

<\/a>Conclusion<\/span><\/strong><\/h2>\n

The Supreme Court’s verdict is a testament to the Court’s ability to employ a harmonious interpretation to broaden the scope of rights and secularize access to remedies. In the process, the Court has also neutralised the perception<\/span> that the right of Muslim women<\/span> to seek maintenance<\/span> under secular provisions stood extinguished since 1986<\/span>.<\/p>\n

The ruling has significantly strengthened the rights of divorced Muslim women<\/span> and is likely to have far-reaching implications for the future trajectory of personal laws in India. It may potentially lead to more challenges to discriminatory practices<\/span> and greater alignment with the Constitution’s principles<\/span> of equality and justice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Read More- The Hindu<\/a>
\nUPSC Syllabus- GS 2- Issues related to Constitution, GS 1- Issues Related to Women<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In a landmark judgment on the right to maintenance of Muslim Women, the Supreme Court (SC) bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Augustine George Masih has held that a divorced Muslim woman can seek alimony from her husband under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Code (CrPc). The court held that Section 125… Continue reading SC verdict on right to maintenance of Muslim Women- Explained Pointwise<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10357,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[130,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-304191","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-7-pm","category-uncategorized","entry"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","views":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/304191","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10357"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=304191"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/304191\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=304191"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=304191"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=304191"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}