MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM 1985

    MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM
    MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM

    Overview:

    Mohd. Ahmad Khan Vs. Shah Bano begum may be a landmark suit that has self-addressed the matter of “Triple Talaq Verdict”. This case is mostly mentioned as “Shah Bano Case”. It’s thought-about to be a debatable and problematic legal contest in India. This legal proceeding has been verified to be a milestone inside the struggle for rights, freedom of Muslim ladies.

    MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM
    MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM

    It is all concerning Shah Bano’s fearless struggle against the system of Triple Talaq. Rather than making history or story of suppressed ladies she courageously faced the embarrassments of the community and her husband.

    Even when she was facing such a forceful scenario in her life she struggled and fought against her husband and faced everybody who was in favor of her husband, and specifically, she courageously was determined to fight against the male-dominated society. She fought against the system of Triple Talaq and eventually her efforts did not go in vain and indeed altered the whole legal system.

    Facts of the case:

    • Mohd Ahmed Khan (the appealing party) was a professional lawyer by profession, married to Shah Bano (the respondent) in 1932, and had 3 sons and 2 daughters from this wedding.
    • In 1975, Shah Bano’s age was sixty-two years; she was repudiated by her partner and was tossed out from her marital status home along with her kids. In 1978, she filed an associate degree inside the presence of Judicial Magistrate of Indore; as a result of which she was abandoned from the maintenance of Rs. two hundred per month that was sure to be provided by him. She demanded Rs. five hundred per month as maintenance.
    • As he gave her irreversible triple talaq, he used it as a defense to not pay her any maintenance or alimony. Later in 1979, the court directed him to pay the respondent, Shah Bano Rs 25 per month. Shah Bano appealed to the court to change the order and demanded a handsome amount of money and changed the amount to Rs 179 per month.

    Contentions of the petitioners:

    • The petitioner, Mohd Ahmed Khan a renowned lawyer in Indore gave divorce to his wife Shah Bano in November 1978 by articulating “Triple Talaq” which was irrevocable.

    • He took the safeguard that because of the divorce Shah Bano was terminated to be his legal wife due to which she was not accountable to any maintenance or alimony.

    • His essential argument was that after divorce he cannot keep any form of alliance or connection with his divorce wife because it is not allowed by Islamic laws/Islam and is “Haram” & hence he is not legally responsible to maintain her wife.

    Contentions of the respondent:

    • Shah Bano, the respondent within the case, brought an appeal under section 125 of the CrPC in the presence of the judicial magistrate of Indore when she was thrown away from her matrimonial home by her husband.
    • Shah Bano filed this suit in 1978 as her husband had abandoned her from the maintenance of Rs 200 per month which he had guaranteed to give.
    • A wife who is without any income and is neglected by her husband is entitled to maintenance, which includes a divorced wife who is not married.

    Issues raised in the case:

    Whether Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is concerned with Muslims or not?

    Whether the amount of Mehr given by the husband on divorce is adequate to get the husband rid and is liable to maintain his wife or not?

    In Islam, iddat is the period a woman must observe after the death of her husband or after a divorce, during which she may not marry another man. One of its main purposes is to remove any doubt as to the paternity of a child born after the divorce or death of the prior husband. Hence, we are going to see an on the spot conflict, since CrPC does not acknowledge the iddat period and maintenance goes on the far side identical.

    Initially, it had been provided inside the CrPC(earlier below section 488) that solely a mate is entitled to maintenance by husband, it was claimed by the husbands that once dissolution takes place, a woman ceases to be a mate and hence is no longer entitled to maintenance. watching this loophole, associate degree change was created in 1973, whereby below section 125, a woman was entitled to maintenance until the time she remarries. Being profane, this provision applies to any or all or any ladies, as well as Muslim ladies.

    Earlier as per the Muslim personal laws, a husband, would only be liable to pay maintenance for the iddat period along with the return of the Mehr. The case, however, was decided in favor of Shah Bano and it was held that Muslims were not excluded from exercising their rights accruing from secular laws.

    In this case, the Supreme Court attempting to ensure continuing respect for Muslim women’s claim to equal treatment, regardless of their membership into a particular religion. However, the Muslim orthodoxy severely condemned it. They saw this case, which had created a breakthrough for Muslim women to address their grievances as an encroachment into the Muslim Shariat Law that they were bound by.

    JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT:

    In the present case, a 62-year-old lady was unmarried and later on denied maintenance. She had not remarried. On moving the court of the judicial magistrate at Indore underneath section 125 of the CrPC, and claiming maintenance of Rs five hundred per month, she was awarded maintenance of Rs twenty-five per month from the husband. Aggrieved by the low quantity, she filed a revision petition before the Madhya Pradesh Supreme Court that entitled her to the upkeep of Rs 179.20 per month.

    The husband appealed against this order before the Supreme Court, his main competition being that since the dissolution had taken place, she ceased to be his married woman and underneath Muslim law, he wasn’t duty-bound to pay her maintenance. Also, since he had paid the dower quantity throughout the Iddat period, the married woman wasn’t entitled to any maintenance.

    The Supreme Court discharged the charm and upheld the choice of the High Court. The Supreme Court explained this judgment by oral communication that, though there’s a conflict, section 125 of CrPC could be a laic law, and hence, applies to all or any ladies, regardless of their faith. It applied that the CrPC laws shall prevail in case of any conflict with the Muslim Personal Law Board.

    Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986:-

    The judgment given in Shah Bano Case has been criticized among Muslims and consistent with them this call was in conflict with the principles of “Quran” and “Islamic Laws/ Islam”. Thus Parliament of Bharat in 1986, (Congress govt.) set to enact the Muslim ladies (Protection of Rights of Divorce) Act, 1986. The most objective of this act was to guard the proper of the unmarried Muslim ladies and or people who got a divorce from their husbands.

    The enactment of this act was done by the govt. of Rajiv Gandhi, to invalidate the decision/decree gone along the Supreme Court in Shah Bano case. Consistent with this act, Muslim unmarried ladies ought to be entitled to associate degree adequate and affordable quantity of maintenance until the Iddat period.

    Once an unmarried girl maintains a baby born by her any time before or when the divorce, the husband is under a legal obligation to supply an exact quantity of maintenance for the kid to an amount of two yrs. From the birth date of a baby. The ladies are licensed to get “Mahr” or “dower” and receive back all the properties or estate that is provided to her by her folks, friends, relatives, husband, or husband’s friends.

    If such benefits aren’t received by the unmarried Muslim ladies from her former husband, she will apply to the jurist for ordering him to supply her with maintenance/alimony or quantity of “Mahr” or dower or her estate or properties.

    Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986
    Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986

    CONCLUSION:

    This was the case of Triple Talaq, which was a historic finding of fact because it maintains the reality and religion of the folks within the judiciary as during this case, “Justice and equality have overcome religion”. These proceedings were a milestone within the judiciary because it was a mettlesome, bold, impartial, and distinctive call.

    This judgment has marked the importance of maintenance that ought to be provided to the unmarried Muslim ladies Who are not in the condition to earn and maintain themselves. Women, under Section 125 of CrPc will affirm maintenance or support payment from their former husbands, or aside from this unmarried Muslim ladies will assert or claim for some cash or quantity under the Muslim ladies Act.

    MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM – Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986 MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM – Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986 MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM – Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986 MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM – Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986 MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM – Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986 MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM – Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986 MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM – Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986 MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM – Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986 MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM – Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986 MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM – Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986 MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM – Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986 MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM – Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986 MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM – Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986 MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM – Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986 MOHD. AHMED KHAN VS. SHAH BANO BEGUM – Muslim Women (Protection Of Rights On Divorce) Act, 1986