Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Judges
Acts
  • provisions of Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, of the Family Courts Act, 1984, and the Muslim Women Act, 1986,
  • Muslim Women (Protection of Right of Divorce) Act, 1986,
  • SECTION 125 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE
  • section 4 of the Muslim Women Act
  • section 5 of the Muslim Women Act
  • Muslim Women Act of 1986.
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Judges
Acts
  • provisions of Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, of the Family Courts Act, 1984, and the Muslim Women Act, 1986,
  • Muslim Women (Protection of Right of Divorce) Act, 1986,
  • SECTION 125 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE
  • section 4 of the Muslim Women Act
  • section 5 of the Muslim Women Act
  • Muslim Women Act of 1986.
Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

This petition challenges the order dated 5.5.1995 passed by the Family Court, Pune, awarding maintenance under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code to a divorced Muslim woman and her two minor children. The respondent, a divorced Muslim woman, filed the maintenance petition before the Family Court. The petitioner-husband contended that the ruling conflicts with the Muslim Women (Protection of Right of Divorce) Act, 1986, which, according to him, repeals the right of a divorced Muslim woman to claim maintenance under section 125 CrPC for the post-iddat period, requiring such claims to be made under section 4 of the said Act instead. The Family Court allowed the application relying on this Court’s earlier ruling in Allabuksh Karim Shaikh v. Noorjahan Allabuksh Shaikh. The present petition raises the question of the Family Court’s jurisdiction to entertain post-iddat maintenance claims under section 125 CrPC by a divorced Muslim woman.

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Is the Family Court empowered to entertain an application under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code filed by a divorced Muslim woman against her former husband for post-iddat period maintenance?

Arguments of the Parties

Petitioner-Husband's Arguments

  • The ruling awarding maintenance under section 125 CrPC is contrary to the Muslim Women (Protection of Right of Divorce) Act, 1986.
  • The Act repeals the right of a divorced Muslim woman to claim maintenance under section 125 CrPC for the post-iddat period.
  • A divorced Muslim woman must claim post-iddat maintenance under section 4 of the 1986 Act before a Magistrate, not under section 125 CrPC.

Family Court's Position

  • The Family Court allowed the maintenance application relying on this Court’s earlier ruling in Allabuksh Karim Shaikh v. Noorjahan Allabuksh Shaikh, which recognized the Family Court’s jurisdiction to entertain such claims under section 125 CrPC.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent Rule or Principle Cited For Application by the Court
Allabuksh Karim Shaikh v. Noorjahan Allabuksh Shaikh Interpretation of the jurisdiction of Family Courts and Magistrates under Chapter IX of the CrPC and the Muslim Women (Protection of Right of Divorce) Act, 1986, particularly regarding maintenance claims by divorced Muslim women for the post-iddat period. The Court relied on this precedent to affirm that a divorced Muslim woman may apply to the Family Court under section 125 CrPC for maintenance during the post-iddat period where a Family Court exists, although the Court expressed doubts about fully accepting this view and referred the matter to a Full Bench.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court analyzed the interplay between Chapter IX of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Family Courts Act, 1984, and the Muslim Women (Protection of Right of Divorce) Act, 1986. It noted that a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to maintenance during the iddat period under section 5 of the Muslim Women Act. For post-iddat maintenance, the woman has two options: apply under section 4 of the Muslim Women Act to a Magistrate or, where a Family Court exists, apply under section 125 CrPC before the Family Court. The Court recognized that the Muslim Women Act repealed the right to claim post-iddat maintenance under section 125 CrPC but also acknowledged the precedent allowing Family Courts to entertain such claims. However, the Court expressed reservations about this interpretation and concluded that the question requires authoritative determination by a Full Bench. Pending that decision, the Court lifted the stay on the maintenance order to ensure the divorced woman is not left without support.

Holding and Implications

The petition is referred to the Full Bench for a definitive decision on whether a Family Court can entertain an application under section 125 CrPC by a divorced Muslim woman claiming post-iddat maintenance.

Meanwhile, the stay on the maintenance order is vacated, and the petitioner-husband is directed to pay maintenance as per the Family Court’s order until the Full Bench decides the issue. The maintenance awarded to the children is confirmed. This decision ensures interim relief to the respondent but does not establish a new binding precedent on the substantive legal question.

    Karim Abdul Rehman Shaikh v. Shehnaj Karim Shaikh

    V.H Bhairavia, J.:— This petition is preferred against the order of awarding maintenance dated 5.5.1995 passed under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code by the Family Court, Pune, in Petition E. No. 652 of 1994.

    2. The petition in the Family Court was filed by the respondent No. 1, a divorced Muslim woman, under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code for maintenance. The Family Court has allowed the said application, and awarded maintenance to respondent No. 1- wife and her two minor children. Mr. Mulla, learned Counsel for the petitioner-husband, has submitted that the aforesaid ruling is contrary to the object and spirit of the Muslim Women (Protection of Right of Divorce) Act, 1986, under which Act, the right of a divorced Muslim woman to claim maintenance from her former husband under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code for the post-iddat period, has been repealed. Therefore, if she wants to claim post-iddat period maintenance, she has to apply under section 4 of the said Act before the learned Magistrate.

    3. In the instant case, application under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code was filed before the Family Court and the Family Court, relying on the ruling of this Court in Allabuksh Karim Shaikh v. Noorjahan Allabuksh Shaikh, allowed the said application. This Court in paragraph 8 of its said judgment has observed thus:

    “As we read the relevant provisions of Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, of the Family Courts Act, 1984, and the Muslim Women Act, 1986, the position appears to us to be as hereunder. A Muslim divorced woman may apply for maintenance before a Magistrate under section 5 of the Muslim Women Act payable to her only during the period of iddat. She may, thereafter, if still unable to maintain herself, apply for maintenance for the post-iddat period also, before a Magistrate, where no Family Court has been constituted, under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure and such application shall be governed and disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Chapter IX only if both the divorced woman and her former husband declared under section 5 of the Muslim Women Act and choose to be so governed. A divorced woman in need for maintenance for the post-iddat period, may also, if she so chooses, apply to a Magistrate under section 4 of the Muslim Women Act for maintenance to be paid to her from such of her relatives as would be entitled to inherit her property on her death, or, that failing, by the Wakf Board. But where a Family Court has been constituted, such a divorced woman, intending to apply for maintenance under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, shall have to apply for maintenance under that Chapter in and before the Family Court and the Finally Court shall have to dispose of such application in accordance with the provisions of that Chapter IX, notwithstanding anything in the Muslim Women Act of 1986. For the post-iddat period maintenance, therefore, the divorced Muslim woman has clear option cither to move a Magistrate under section 4 of the Muslim Women Act or to apply to the family Court, if there is one for maintenance under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It may be noted that while under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, there is an upper limit fixed and not exceeding Rs. 500/- per month, under section 4 of the Muslim Women Act there is no such limit fixed.”

    4. Therefore, now the question arises for my consideration is:

    5. Is the Family Court empowered to entertain an application under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code filed by a divorced woman against her former husband for post-iddat period maintenance?

    6. Having gone through the various authorities on this point, the consistent view of the various Courts is that since the Act came into force, a Muslim woman is entitled to claim post-iddat period maintenance under section 4 of the said Act and not under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The view taken by this Court in the case of Allabuksh v. Noorjahan (supra) is that the Family Court has power to entertain an application under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code by a divorced Muslim woman. I have my own doubts in accepting this ruling. Therefore, in the interests of fair justice, this matter requires to be referred to Full Bench for decision.

    7. In this view of the matter, this matter be referred to Full Bench to decide the following issue:

    8. Can a, Family Court hear an application filed by a divorced Muslim woman under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, claiming post-iddat period maintenance against her former husband?

    9. However, since the execution of the order granting maintenance passed by the Family Court is stayed pending this petition, respondent No. 1- wife is not getting anything towards maintenance from the petitioner-husband. In my view, pending the reference, respondent No. 1- wife should not be kept without any maintenance. In view of this, it is ordered that the said stay is vacated and the petitioner-husband is directed to pay the maintenance as per the order of the Family Court till the Full Bench decides the aforesaid issue. However, the order regarding maintenance awarded to the children is confirmed.

    10. Certified copy is expedited.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Karim Abdul Rehman Shaikh v. Shehnaj Karim Shaikh
    (Jul 4, 1997)