Background and Facts
In the landmark case of Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (AIR 1985 SC 945), the Supreme Court of India addressed the issue of a Muslim husband’s obligation to provide maintenance to his divorced wife. Shah Bano, after being divorced by her husband through triple talaq, filed a petition under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, seeking maintenance. Her husband argued that under Muslim personal law, his obligation ended after the iddat period. However, Shah Bano contended that Section 125 CrPC applied to all citizens irrespective of religion and aimed to prevent destitution. This case marked a crucial intersection between personal laws and the secular principles of Indian constitutional law.
Issues and Legal Reasoning
The main legal issue was whether a Muslim husband’s liability to provide maintenance to his divorced wife ceased after the iddat period under personal law, or whether Section 125 CrPC required continued support. The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Y.V. Chandrachud, held that Section 125 CrPC is a secular provision meant to prevent vagrancy and thus applies to all citizens, regardless of religion. The Court clarified that maintenance beyond iddat was permissible if the woman was unable to maintain herself. The judgment harmonized Muslim personal law with constitutional morality, emphasizing that religion cannot override fundamental rights or statutory protection under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
Judgment and Significance
The Court ruled in favor of Shah Bano, affirming that her husband must provide maintenance even after the iddat period. This judgment became a milestone in advancing gender justice and women’s rights in India. It reinforced that personal laws are subject to constitutional scrutiny and should align with principles of equality and human dignity. Although the decision sparked controversy, leading to the enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, the judgment remains a cornerstone for women’s empowerment. It highlighted the balance between respecting personal laws and ensuring that no individual, especially women, is left destitute.
Real-Time Example
In a similar modern context, if a Muslim woman is divorced and left without financial means, she can still claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, as reaffirmed in Danial Latifi v. Union of India (2001). This case upheld the constitutional validity of the 1986 Act while ensuring that Muslim women receive a fair and reasonable settlement. Shah Bano’s case thus continues to guide courts in interpreting maintenance laws with a gender-sensitive and constitutional approach, protecting divorced women from economic vulnerability.
Mnemonic to Remember the Case
Mnemonic: 🔹 “SHAH = Secular Help After Husband”
Breakdown:
- S – Secular law applies (Section 125 CrPC)
- H – Husband’s duty continues after iddat
- A – Article 14 and 21 support equality and life
- H – Historic judgment empowering women
This mnemonic helps recall that Shah Bano’s case stands for secular applicability of maintenance laws and the constitutional protection of women’s rights under Indian Family Law.
About lawgnan:
To understand the Shah Bano Case (1985) and its revolutionary impact on Muslim Law and women’s rights in India, visit Lawgnan.in. This case redefined maintenance laws, balancing personal law with constitutional equality under Articles 14 and 21. Lawgnan.in provides detailed case summaries, legal reasoning, and mnemonics for quick recall, perfect for law students and aspirants. Learn how this judgment led to landmark reforms, including the 1986 Muslim Women Act, and continues to shape modern family law. Master landmark case laws and constitutional principles with clear, exam-oriented notes — exclusively at Lawgnan.in.
