Shah Bano case, 1985

Why in news?

The Bollywood film ‘Haq’, set to be released on November 7 and starring Yami Gautam and Emraan Hashmi, is inspired by the 1985 Shah Bano case.

• Background – Shah Bano Begum, a 62-year-old Muslim woman from Indore, was divorced by her husband, Mohd. Ahmed Khan, after 43 years of marriage.
• She filed a petition under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which mandates maintenance for wives unable to support themselves, regardless of religion.
• Supreme Court (SC) Verdict (1985)
  • The SC ruled in favor of Shah Bano, Section 125 of the CrPC is a secular provision that applies to all citizens irrespective of their religion.
  • Its purpose is to prevent destitution, and Muslim women cannot be excluded from its protection.
  • Emphasized that Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) does not prohibit maintenance for divorced women unable to support themselves.
  • Invoked Article 44, advocating for a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) to ensure legal equality across religions.
• Opposition to  judgment – The verdict triggered intense backlash from conservative Muslim groups, who viewed it as interference in religious laws.
  • In response, the Rajiv Gandhi government passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986.
  • It diluted the Supreme Court ruling by limiting maintenance to the iddat period (waiting period of 3 months post-divorce, during which a woman cannot remarry).
• Challenge to the 1986 Act –
  • Danial Latifi Case (2001) – The SC preserved the spirit of Shah Bano judgment while retaining the 1986 Act.
  • Focused on Section 3(1)(a) of 1986 act stated that husband must make a “reasonable and fair provision and maintenance” within the iddat period.
  • The court interpreted it liberally to protect women's rights—make a one-time payment to cover the woman’s entire future needs, not just 3 months.
• Mohd. Abdul Samad v State of Telangana (2024)
  • Question – Unclear whether Muslim women could still seek maintenance under Section 125 of CrPC, or were restricted to the 1986 Act.
  • The court ruled that the 1986 Act is not a substitute for CrPC Section 125.
  • Clarified – A divorced Muslim woman can choose either law or both for claiming maintenance and has the option to seek a remedy.

Reference

Indian Express | Shah Bano case