• UGI USER
  • Jul 15, 2024
  • 10 Likes
  • 0 Comments

REAFFIRMING A RIGHT

Relevance: GS 2 – Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation.

Why in the news?

  • The Supreme Court (SC) ruling ensures divorced Muslim women have access to maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
  • This judgment empowers Muslim women to choose between seeking maintenance under the Muslim Women (Right to Maintenance) Act, 1986, or the CrPC (Section 125) – or even both.
    • This CrPC section is a secular provision applicable to all, ensuring equal treatment under the law irrespective of religion.
  • This verdict upholds a woman’s right to financial support after divorce, a fundamental right guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.

Historical Context

  • Fuzlunbi v K Khader Vali and Another (1980): Justice VR Krishna Iyer Iyer noted that Section 125 was designed with a deliberate secular intent to enforce maintenance obligations, derived from the state’s responsibility for social welfare.
    • This provision is not limited to members of one religion or region but applies to the entire community of womanhood.
  • Shah Bano Case (1985): Supreme Court ruling in Mohd Ahmed Khan vs Shah Bano Begum which became controversial.
  • Muslim Women (Right to Maintenance) Act, 1986: The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act of 1986 was enacted, creating new rights for divorced Muslim women to claim maintenance during the iddat period and a fair and reasonable provision for the future.
  • Danial Latifi and Another vs Union of India (2001): Danial Latifi, Shah Bano’s lawyer in the Supreme Court, challenged the constitutional validity of the MWA.
    • A five-judge Constitution Bench upheld the constitutional validity of the Act but provided an innovative interpretation of Section 3(a) to secure the rights of divorced Muslim women.
    • Maintenance Requirements: The Court ruled that the former husband must:
      • Pay maintenance for the three-month iddat period.
      • Provide a fair and reasonable provision for the wife’s entire life, within the iddat period.
      • Iddat Period: This is a mandatory period of three months during which the divorced Muslim woman cannot remarry.

Case Background

  • Recent Case: Mohd Abdul Samad vs The State of Telangana
  • Key Judgement: The Supreme Court upheld the divorced Muslim woman’s right to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973.
  • Legal Question: Whether the enactment of the MWA prevents divorced Muslim women from filing an application under Section 125 of the CrPC.
  • Judicial Ambiguity
    • Contradictory Rulings: Various high courts provided conflicting judgments on the issue over the decades.
    • Supreme Court’s Clarification: The Supreme Court cleared the ambiguity, stating that the MWA does not extinguish the rights of divorced Muslim women under Section 125 of the CrPC.
  • Case Details
    • Initial Proceedings: The deserted wife approached the family court in Telangana for maintenance under Section 125.
    • Family Court’s Award: The family court awarded her Rs 20,000 as monthly maintenance.
    • Husband’s Divorce and Argument: The husband divorced her and argued she was not entitled to claim maintenance post-divorce, asserting her rights lay under the MWA.
  • Legal Arguments by Husband’s Submission:
    1. The 1986 Act provides a more beneficial and efficacious remedy for divorced Muslim women compared to Section 125 of the CrPC.
    2. The 1986 Act, being a special law, prevails over the general provisions of the CrPC.
  • Telangana High Court’s Ruling:
    • Rejected both submissions by the husband.
    • Reduced the maintenance amount to Rs 10,000 per month.

Supreme Court Ruling on Wife’s Right to Maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC

  • Date and Bench: On July 10, a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Augustine George Masih of the Supreme Court upheld the wife’s right to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC.
  • The ruling emphasized that Section 125 is a socially beneficial provision and that this right is not extinguished by the enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (MWA).
  • Clarification on Applicability of Section 125 of the CrPC
    • The Danial Latifi ruling did not directly address the applicability of Section 125 of the CrPC to a divorced Muslim woman.
    • The Court stated that there was no express extinguishment of rights under Section 125 by the MWA. The legislature did not intend or conceive such extinguishment.
    • Different Domains:
      • Section 125 of the CrPC addresses the inability to maintain oneself.
      • Section 3 of the 1986 Act is independent of one’s ability or inability to maintain oneself.
    • Harmonious and Purposive Approach: The Court adopted this approach to ensure that the rights of divorced Muslim women are protected under both provisions.

Clarification on Rights of Divorced Muslim Women

  • Equality in Maintenance Rights: The Court clarified that a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to the same maintenance rights as other similarly situated women in the country.
  • Fundamental Rights: An interpretation denying these rights would infringe upon the fundamental rights provided by Articles 14 (equality before law), 15 (prohibition of discrimination), and 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) of the Constitution.
  • Nature of Magistrate’s Power: The power and jurisdiction vested in a magistrate under these provisions are neither punitive nor remedial; they are preventive measures.
  • Independence from Personal Laws: The Court observed that while personal laws may influence the rights of the concerned parties, these rights under the secular provision of Section 125 shall continue to exist independently.

Way Forward

  • Uniform Implementation: Ensure that the provisions of Section 125 of the CrPC are uniformly applied to all women, regardless of their religion or personal laws.
  • Awareness Programs: Conduct awareness programs to educate divorced women, especially from minority communities, about their rights under Section 125.
  • Training for Judiciary and Law Enforcement: Provide training to judges and law enforcement officials on the secular and preventive nature of Section 125 to ensure consistent and fair implementation.
  • Legal Aid and Support: Strengthen legal aid services to help divorced women access their rights under Section 125, including providing assistance in filing and pursuing maintenance claims.
  • Monitoring and Reporting: Establish mechanisms to monitor the implementation of Section 125 and report on its effectiveness in protecting the rights of divorced women.
  • Legislative Clarity: Consider legislative amendments to further clarify the relationship between personal laws and the secular provisions of Section 125, ensuring no ambiguity in their application.
  • Collaboration with NGOs and Women’s Rights Organizations: Work with NGOs and women’s rights organizations to support divorced women in securing their maintenance rights and to advocate for necessary policy changes.

Alternative Articles:

Source: The Indian Express

Mains question

Discuss the implications of the Supreme Court’s recent ruling upholding the right of divorced Muslim women to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC on gender equality and social justice.