Ahmad Khan vs Shah Banoo Begum 1985 SCR (3) 844

Appellant: Mohd. Ahmed Khan

Respondent: Shah Bano Begum & ors
Introduction
According to the holy Quran, both men and women have equal status and rights under
Islamic personal law. However, the explanation behind this is debatable. Education,
polygamy, maintenance, and the wearing of the headscarf have all been hotly debated topics.
Mohd. Ahmad Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985), often known as the Shah Bano case, is
widely regarded as a watershed moment in the campaign for Muslim women's equality in
India. It made it possible for thousands of women to assert rights that had previously been
forbidden
Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, there was substantial disagreement about the application of
Indian laws to the personal affairs of people who were regulated by their own independent
personal laws. One such point of contention was the applicability of Section 125 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) to Muslims. According to this section, a 'First Class
Magistrate could order a husband to provide a monthly allowance to his wife/divorced wife
(as long as she had not remarried) if he neglected to maintain her and she was unable to
maintain herself'. The major goal of the law was to ensure the economic independence of
women who were financially dependent on their husbands; it was a harmless measure aimed
to improve the situation. The major goal of the law was to ensure the economic independence
of women who were economically reliant on their husbands; it was a benevolent measure
created to improve the economic situation of neglected wives and abandoned divorcees.
Background
Ahmad Khan and Shah Bano Begum are associated with a significant legal and social
controversy that took place in India in the 1980s. The case is commonly known as the "Shah
Bano case," and it revolved around issues of divorce, maintenance, and the rights of Muslim
women in India.
Shah Bano Begum was a Muslim woman who was married to a man named Mohammad
Ahmad Khan. In 1978, Ahmad Khan divorced her using the triple talaq method, which is a
practice under Islamic law where a husband can unilaterally divorce his wife by saying the
word "talaq" three times. Following the divorce, Shah Bano filed a petition in court seeking
maintenance from her husband, as she was left without financial support.
The case gained widespread attention in 1985 when the Supreme Court of India ruled in favor
of Shah Bano and granted her maintenance, under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, which pertains to maintenance of wives, children, and parents. The court held that
the provisions of Section 125 applied to all Indian citizens regardless of their religion, and
Muslim women were entitled to maintenance under this law.
This decision led to a significant debate and controversy, particularly within the Muslim
community, as some felt that the court's ruling interfered with Muslim personal law. There
were concerns about the court's jurisdiction over religious matters and the potential erosion of
religious autonomy.
In response to the controversy, the Indian government, led by Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi,
passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act in 1986. This act aimed to
address the concerns raised by the Muslim community by specifically exempting Muslim
women from being eligible for maintenance under Section 125. It was seen as a compromise
between ensuring social justice for women and respecting religious sentiments.
The Shah Bano case and the subsequent legislation sparked discussions about the balance
between gender equality and religious practices in India. The case highlighted the
complexities of addressing women's rights and religious freedom within a diverse and
pluralistic society.
Facts
In 1932, Shah Bano married Mohd. Ahmad Khan, a renowned lawyer in Indore. They had 5
children. After 14 years, her husband married a younger woman. In 1975, at 62 years old,
Shah Bano was disowned and thrown out of her home with her children. After being removed
by her husband from their marital residence in April 1978, she filed an appeal in front of an
Indore judicial magistrate in accordance with Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 (CrPC). Due to her husband's abandonment of the support of Rs. 200 per month that he
promised to provide, Shah Bano filed this lawsuit in 1978. The husband later gave her Triple
Talaq and used it as a defence for his case.
His defence to Shah Bano petition for maintenance was that she had ceased to be his wife by
reason of the divorce granted by him, to provide that he was therefore under no obligation
maintenance for her, that he had already paid maintenance to her at the rate of Rs. 200 per
month for about two years and that, he had deposited a sum of Rs. 3000 in the court by way
of dower during the period the of iddat. The learned Magistrate directed Ahmad Khan to pay
a princely sum of Rs. 25 per month to the respondent by way of maintenance
In July 1980, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh increased the amount of support to Rs.
179.20 per month in a revisional application submitted by the wife. As a result, the other
person sought special leave to appear before the Supreme Court.
Issues:
i. Whether Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is concerned with
Muslims or not?
ii. Whether the amount of Mehr given by the husband on divorce is adequate to get
the husband rid of maintaining his wife?
iii. Whether Uniform Civil Code applies to all religions or not?
Judgement:
C.J. Chandrachud delivered the Shah Bano case verdict. The two Muslim organizations who
joined the lawsuit as intervenors were the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board and Jamiat
ulema-e-Hind. In this case, the Supreme Court reached a similar judgment on February 3rd,
1981, dismissing Mohd. Ahmad Khan's argument and upholding the High Court's decision.
The court determined that without engaging in any form of discrimination, Section 125 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure solicited to Muslims as well.
 Although this situation does not include the rule of law that is mentioned in Section 125 of
CrPc.,1973, the Supreme Court correctly decided in this instance that Muslim husbands'
obligations to their divorced wives are confined to the "Iddat" term. The Supreme Court ruled
that this provision violated human rights or was incorrect because a divorced woman in this
case was unable to support herself.
So, in the end, the court determined that if the divorced woman is capable of supporting
herself, the husband's legal responsibility will stop. The position will be reversed, however, if
the woman is unable to support herself financially or otherwise after the Iddat term and
qualifies for maintenance or alimony under Section 125 of the CrPc.
Conclusion
This landmark case triggered a significant dispute over the applicability of Section 125 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure to Indian Muslims, aimed at securing financial autonomy for
neglected wives. Shah Bano Begum's pursuit of spousal support after being abandoned by her
husband initiated a legal and societal discourse spotlighting the tensions between religious
traditions and women's rights. The Supreme Court's 1985 ruling, favouring Shah Bano and
acknowledging her entitlement to maintenance under Section 125, generated both acclaim
and controversy. This stance catalyzed broader dialogues concerning the interplay between
gender parity and religious practices.
However, the aftermath introduced the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act
in 1986, exempting Muslim women from Section 125. This move sparked further
conversations about striking a balance between gender equality and religious sovereignty.
The case and its repercussions underscored the intricate challenges in addressing women's
rights and religious liberties within India's diverse society.
Shah Bano's story unraveled a narrative of a woman left divorced, disowned, and financially
unsupported after decades of marriage. Her pursuit of justice within the legal system
triggered a profound assessment of how Islamic law aligns with modern legal values. The
court's recognition of Section 125's applicability to Muslims marked a significant stride
toward ensuring financial self-reliance for women.
Ultimately, the Shah Bano case emphasized the need to harmonize religious customs with
contemporary notions of justice and equality. It persists as a historical milestone that
resonates with the ongoing struggle for gender parity and rights, situated within the intricate
web of diverse cultural and religious norms.