TAG: GS 2: POLITY
THE CONTEXT: The Supreme Court’s recent dismissal of a Muslim man’s appeal against a Telangana High Court order, which allowed his ex-wife to seek maintenance under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), reaffirms the legal provisions for the maintenance of divorced Muslim women under Indian law.
EXPLANATION:
- This ruling follows a 22-year-old landmark precedent and highlights the ongoing legal and political discourse surrounding the rights of Muslim women.
Legal Framework for Maintenance under CrPC
- Section 125 of the CrPC mandates that “any person having sufficient means” must maintain “his wife” or “his legitimate or illegitimate minor child” if they are unable to maintain themselves.
- The term “wife” includes a divorced woman who has not remarried.
- This provision aims to provide a social justice measure embedded in the constitutional philosophy to support destitute, deserted, and deprived women.
- A two-judge Bench reiterated that a Muslim woman is entitled to seek maintenance from her husband under Section 125 of the CrPC, even if divorced under religious personal law.
- This underscores the secular nature of the legislation, which transcends religious boundaries to ensure the welfare of women.
Case Analysis
- Petitioner challenged a 2017 family court order directing him to pay Rs 20,000 per month in maintenance to his former wife.
- The Telangana High Court upheld the family court’s decision, leading to the Supreme Court appeal.
- One of the Justice emphasized that Section 125 CrPC aligns with the constitutional mandate of social justice, protecting the rights of women against gender-based discrimination.
- The ruling clarifies that the maintenance provisions under CrPC are supplementary to the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (MWPRD Act), rather than conflicting with it.
Historical Context: Shah Bano Case
- Shah Bano’s Plea for Maintenance
- In 1978, Shah Bano Begum sought maintenance from her husband under Section 125 CrPC after being divorced through ‘irrevocable talaq.’
- Her husband argued that, according to Muslim personal law, his obligation was limited to the iddat period (three months post-divorce).
- The Madhya Pradesh High Court granted her plea, a decision later upheld by the Supreme Court.
- Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling
- The Supreme Court, in a five-judge Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice Y V Chandrachud, ruled that Section 125 CrPC applies irrespective of religion, ensuring maintenance for divorced wives beyond the iddat period if they cannot maintain themselves.
- This judgment highlighted the secular nature of the CrPC provisions.
- Political Response: MWPRD Act, 1986
- In response to the Shah Bano ruling, the Rajiv Gandhi government enacted the MWPRD Act, 1986, shifting the maintenance responsibility post-iddat to the woman’s relatives or the State Wakf Board.
- This move aimed to align maintenance laws with Muslim personal law, sparking significant controversy and debate.
Challenge to the MWPRD Act
- Danial Latifi’s Petition
- Shah Bano’s lawyer challenged the constitutionality of the MWPRD Act.
- It was argued that it discriminated against Muslim women and violated their rights to equality and life with dignity under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
- Supreme Court’s Interpretation
- To reconcile the MWPRD Act with the need for maintenance beyond the iddat period, the Supreme Court creatively interpreted Section 3(a) of the Act.
- It ruled that the husband must make a reasonable and fair provision for the divorced wife’s future needs within the iddat period, with the actual payment potentially extending throughout her life unless she remarries.
- This interpretation upheld the Act’s constitutionality while ensuring continued maintenance for divorced Muslim women.
