Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Shabana Parveen, filed a Criminal Revision Application under Section 482 read with Section 397 of the Criminal Procedure Code, challenging the order dated 20.8.2003 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Akola in Criminal Revision Application No.89/2002. The applicant had originally filed an application under Section 125 CrPC in Misc. Criminal Application No.917/2000 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Akola, claiming maintenance from her husband, Mohd. Ashfaque. During the pendency of those proceedings, the husband divorced her, and the application was partly converted to one under Section 3(2) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. The applicant contended that she married the respondent on 28.5.1998 as per Muslim rites, and her parents spent Rs.75,000/- including gift articles worth Rs.20,000/-. After some time, the husband started ill-treating her, demanding more money from her retired father, and eventually drove her out of the matrimonial home. The Magistrate allowed the application and granted maintenance. However, the Sessions Judge in revision reduced the maintenance, limiting it to the iddat period only. The High Court, after considering the submissions, held that under Section 3(2) of the Muslim Women Act, a Muslim divorcee is entitled to a reasonable and fair provision for her future maintenance beyond the iddat period. The court found that the Sessions Judge had erred in restricting the maintenance to the iddat period and set aside that part of the order, restoring the Magistrate's order granting maintenance.
Headnote
A) Muslim Law - Maintenance - Section 3(2) Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 - Reasonable and fair provision - The court held that a Muslim divorcee is entitled to a reasonable and fair provision for her future maintenance beyond the iddat period, and the husband is liable to pay such amount. The Sessions Judge erred in reducing the maintenance to only the iddat period. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a Muslim divorcee is entitled to maintenance beyond the iddat period under Section 3(2) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, and whether the order of the Sessions Judge reducing maintenance was correct.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the revision application, set aside the order of the Sessions Judge dated 20.8.2003, and restored the order of the Magistrate granting maintenance.
Law Points
- Maintenance to Muslim divorcee
- Section 3(2) Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act
- 1986
- Section 125 CrPC
- Reasonable and fair provision
- Iddat period
Case Details
2006 LawText (BOM) (10) 93
Criminal Revision Application No.187 of 2003
Mr. Homd Moin, Shabbir Hussain for applicant; Mr. Anil Mardikar, Miss. P. Tiwari for respondents
Shabana Parveen d/o Abdul Jabbar Khan
Mohd. Ashfaque s/o Mohammed Mazhar, The State of Maharashtra
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal Revision Application challenging the order of Sessions Judge reducing maintenance granted to a Muslim divorcee.
Remedy Sought
The applicant sought restoration of the Magistrate's order granting maintenance beyond the iddat period.
Filing Reason
The applicant was aggrieved by the Sessions Judge's order reducing maintenance to only the iddat period.
Previous Decisions
The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Akola allowed the application under Section 125 CrPC and Section 3(2) of the Muslim Women Act. The 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Akola in Criminal Revision Application No.89/2002 reduced the maintenance to the iddat period only.
Issues
Whether the Sessions Judge was correct in reducing the maintenance to only the iddat period?
Whether a Muslim divorcee is entitled to maintenance beyond the iddat period under Section 3(2) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986?
Submissions/Arguments
The applicant argued that she was entitled to a reasonable and fair provision for her future maintenance beyond the iddat period.
The respondent argued that the maintenance should be limited to the iddat period.
Ratio Decidendi
Under Section 3(2) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, a Muslim divorcee is entitled to a reasonable and fair provision for her future maintenance beyond the iddat period. The Sessions Judge erred in restricting the maintenance to the iddat period only.
Judgment Excerpts
The applicant being aggrieved by the order passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Akola in Criminal Revision Application No.89/2002 dated 20.8.2003 has challenged that order.
During the pendency of the proceedings, the non applicant – husband divorced her. Therefore, the said application was partly converted under section 3(2) of the Muslim Women [Protection of Rights on Divorce] Act, 1986 beside claim under section 125 Cr.P.C.
Procedural History
The applicant filed Misc. Criminal Application No.917/2000 under Section 125 CrPC before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Akola. During pendency, the husband divorced her, and the application was partly converted under Section 3(2) of the Muslim Women Act. The Magistrate allowed the application. The respondent filed Criminal Revision Application No.89/2002 before the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Akola, who reduced the maintenance to the iddat period. The applicant then filed the present Criminal Revision Application No.187 of 2003 before the High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 125, 397, 482
- Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986: 3(2)
