The
Supreme Court has appointed Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Senior Advocate
Siddhartha Dave as amicus curiae (pro bono) to assist in determining whether a
Family Court can grant permanent alimony to a Muslim woman following the
dissolution of her marriage under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939,
and whether such alimony can be modified if she remarries. A bench comprising
Justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra passed the order, citing the
significance of the legal issues involved.
The case
stems from an appeal filed by a man challenging the Gujarat High Court’s March
19, 2020 order, which upheld the Family Court’s decision to grant a divorce
decree to a Muslim woman along with a lump sum lifetime maintenance of Rs.10,00,000. In a previous hearing on February 17, the bench directed the parties to submit
the 2024 judgment in Mohd. Abdul Samad v. State of Telangana, which affirmed
that Muslim women are entitled to seek maintenance under Section 125 of the
CrPC.
The
Family Court’s ruling relied on the landmark Danial Latifi & Anr v. Union
of India (2001) case, in which the Supreme Court held that a Muslim husband
must make reasonable and fair provisions for the future of his divorced wife,
including maintenance. The Court also ruled that such provisions, extending
beyond the iddat period, must be arranged within the iddat period in accordance
with Section 3(1) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act,
1986. This case upheld the constitutionality of the 1986 Act.
Under
the 1986 Act, a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to a reasonable and fair
provision during the iddat period. Additionally, if she does not remarry and is
unable to support herself after the iddat period, she can claim maintenance.
The
Gujarat High Court upheld the Family Court's decision after thoroughly
examining the status of Muslim women, relevant legal precedents, and applicable
laws. It declined to modify the Family Court's order despite being informed
that the Muslim woman had remarried.
The
Gujarat High Court bench of Justice JB Pardiwala (now a Supreme Court judge)
and Justice Vireshkumar Mayani upheld the Family Court’s ruling, outlining key
conclusions. It stated that before the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act,
1939, Muslim women had no legal right to seek divorce; however, the Act granted
them a statutory right to obtain one. A divorce obtained under this Act is
legally valid under Muslim law, entitling the woman to reasonable and fair
provision under the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986.
The Court emphasized that the Family Courts Act, 1984, applies to all
communities, including Muslims, and disputes under Section 3 of the 1986 Act
fall within its jurisdiction. It further held that maintenance and matrimonial
property rights arise as consequences of marriage or divorce, making permanent
alimony an integral part of the divorce decree. The Court clarified that while
maintenance payments cease upon remarriage, a one-time lump sum alimony granted
under Section 3(1)(a) of the 1986 Act is final and cannot be modified upon the
wife’s remarriage.
Challenging
this decision, the ex-husband filed an appeal before the Gujarat High Court.
The matter is now scheduled for hearing on April 15 at 2 PM.
info@adhwaitha.com