Discuss the applicability of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. to Muslims after the enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Divorce) Act, 1986.
Find the question and answer of Muslim Law only on Legal Bites.
Question: Discuss the applicability of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. to Muslims after the enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Divorce) Act, 1986. [HJS 2006]Find the question and answer of Muslim Law only on Legal Bites. [Discuss the applicability of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. to Muslims after the enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Divorce) Act, 1986.] AnswerThe Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 is a declaratory law and codifies some...
Question: Discuss the applicability of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. to Muslims after the enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Divorce) Act, 1986. [HJS 2006]
Find the question and answer of Muslim Law only on Legal Bites. [Discuss the applicability of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. to Muslims after the enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Divorce) Act, 1986.]
Answer
The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 is a declaratory law and codifies some pre-existing rules of Muslim Law. Under this law, maintenance can be claimed by the divorced husband, relatives, or Wakf Board. The Act makes provision for:
• Maintenance of a divorced Muslim woman during and after the period of Iddat and
• For enforcing her claim to unpaid dower and other exclusive properties.
Mainly the Act provides reasonable, fair provisions and maintenance to be made and paid from her former husband within the period of Iddat. The word 'provision' in relation to the Act would mean an act of providing something beforehand or arranging in advance to meet the needs of the divorced wife. It may be that provision can be made for her other needs, such as clothes, food, and other things depending upon the means of the husband.
In the case of Makiur Rahaman Khan v. Mahila Bibi, 2002 Crlj 1751, the point for consideration before the Calcutta High Court was whether a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to invoke the provisions of section 125 of Crpc for her maintenance against her sons and whether such a proceeding under section 125 of Crpc against the sons of the divorced Muslim woman is maintainable when a proceeding under sections 3, 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 is pending before the Court of competent jurisdiction.
The Court held that section 125 Crpc was enacted to provide a quick summary remedy to persons unable to maintain themselves. Quoting the judgment of Apex Court in Danial Latifi v. Union of India, writ Petition (civil) 868 of 1986, the Court held that the proceeding under section 125 of Crpc against the children of the respondent's mother is quite maintainable despite the pendency of the proceeding under sections 3 and 4 of the Act against her husband.
In Daniel Latifi v. Union of India, writ Petition (civil) 868 of 1986, Court advocated the validity of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, and came to the following conclusion:
1) A Muslim husband is liable to make reasonable and fair provisions for the future of the divorced wife, which obviously includes her maintenance as well. Such a reasonable and fair provision extending beyond the iddat period must be made by the husband within the iddat period in terms of Section 3(1)(a) of the Act.
2) Liability of a Muslim husband to his divorced wife arising under Section 3(1)(a) of the Act to pay maintenance is not confined to the iddat period.
3) A divorced Muslim woman who has not remarried and who is not able to maintain herself after the iddat period can proceed as provided under Section 4 of the Act against her relatives who are liable to maintain her in proportion to the properties which they inherit on her death according to Muslim law from such divorced woman including her children and parents. If any of the relatives being unable to pay maintenance, the Magistrate may direct the State Wakf Board established under the Act to pay such maintenance.
In Shabana Bano v. Imran Khan, (2010) 1 SCC 666, in a petition for maintenance under Section 125, one of the objections raised by the husband was that he had already divorced the wife before the filing of the petition in accordance with Muslim Law and under the provisions of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 she is not entitled to any maintenance after the divorce and after the expiry of the iddat period. The Supreme Court, however, held that even after the disposal of the application under section 3 of the Act, the divorced wife is entitled to claim maintenance under section 125 beyond the iddat period until she remarries.
Mayank Shekhar
Mayank is an alumnus of the prestigious Faculty of Law, Delhi University. Under his leadership, Legal Bites has been researching and developing resources through blogging, educational resources, competitions, and seminars.