A divorced Muslim woman can seek alimony from her husband under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure - the law related to maintenance for wives
The Supreme Court has ruled that Muslim women may file for maintenance from their divorced husbands under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
In today's DNA, Anant Tyagi analyses what the Supreme Court said on maintenance for Muslim women
A person with sufficient wealth cannot refuse support to his wife, children, or parents, according to Section 125 of the CrPC.
The top court also echoed that the time has come for Indian men to recognise the role and sacrifice of 'homemakers' who are the strength and backbone of an Indian family and they must provide financial support to her by having joint accounts and ATMs.
A bench of justices BV Nagarathna and Augustine George Masih ruled that Section 125 CrPC, which deals with wife's legal right to maintenance, applies to all women and a divorced Muslim female can claim maintenance from her husband under it.
In doing so, the court clarified that a Muslim woman's rights under the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act of 1986 are extra legal rights that she can obtain on top of existing laws. It is noteworthy that the 1986 Act permits a Muslim woman who has divorced to receive support; nevertheless, this provision is restricted to the Iddat period.
This phase often lasts for ninety days following the divorce. The court has stated that it is important to emphasise that a divorced Muslim woman is not prohibited from exercising her independent right to maintenance under the secular provision of Section 125 of the CrPC in light of the provisions of the 1986 Act.
"Section 125 of the CrPC applies to all married women including Muslim married women. Section 125 of the CrPC applies to all non-Muslim divorced women," the top court said.
"Insofar as divorced Muslim women are concerned, - i) Section 125 of the CrPC applies to all such Muslim women, married and divorced under the Special Marriage Act in addition to remedies available. If Muslim women are married and divorced under Muslim law then Section 125 of the CrPC as well as the provisions of the 1986 Act are applicable. Option lies with the Muslim divorced women to seek remedy under either of the two laws or both laws. This is because the 1986 Act is not in derogation of Section 125 of the CrPC but in addition to the said provision," the top court said.
If Section 125 of the CrPC is also resorted to by a divorced Muslim woman, as per the definition under the 1986 Act, then any order passed under the provisions of 1986 Act shall be taken into consideration under Section 127(3)(b) of the CrPC, the court said.
The 1986 Act could be resorted to by a divorced Muslim woman, as defined under the said act, by applying thereunder which could be disposed off by the said enactment, the court said.
In case of an illegal divorce as per the provisions of the 2019 Act then, relief under Section 5 of the said Act could be availed for seeking subsistence allowance or, at the option of such a Muslim woman, remedy under Section 125 of the CrPC could also be availed, the court said.
Adding further to it, the top court directed if during the pendency of a petition filed under Section 125 of the CrPC, a Muslim woman is 'divorced' then she can take recourse under Section 125 of the CrPC or file a petition under the 2019 Act.
"The provisions of the 2019 Act provide remedy in addition to and not in derogation of Section 125 of the CrPC," the top court said.
The top court's ruling came on an appeal challenging the High Court of Telangana order dated December 13, 2023 which modified the family court decision. HC decreased the quantum of interim maintenance payable by the Appellant herein from Rs 20,000 per month to 10,000 per month. Senior Advocate S Wasim A Qadri along with advocate Saeed Qadri appeared for the husband in the matter.
The man has challenged the maintenance amount saying that section 125 is not maintainable given sections 3,4 and 5 of the Muslim women ( protection of rights of divorce) Act 1986.
The top court said that the High Court of Telangana, while modifying the Order of the Family Court, was correct in upholding the maintainability of the petition filed under Section 125 of CrPC and therefore, there is no infirmity in its impugned order dated December 13, 2023.
What is the case?
The case of Mohamed Abdul Samad v. State of Telangana and Anr is the subject of the Supreme Court's decision. The spouse in this instance, Abdul Samad, filed a complaint regarding support demands made by his ex-wife, from whom he separated in 2017.
Abdul Samad was first mandated by a family court to provide interim support to his ex-wife at the rate of Rs 20,000 per month.
He appealed this ruling to the Telangana High Court, claiming that the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 prevents a divorced Muslim lady from claiming alimony under Section 125 CrPC, in accordance with Muslim personal law.
The maintenance was then lowered by the high court to ₹10,000 per month. Abdul Samad appealed the High Court's ruling to the Supreme Court.
(with inputs from ANI)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "File pic")
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}