The Allahabad High Court allowed a revision petition against the judgment and order dated 20.09.2021, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, under Section 125 Cr.P.C., whereby the case of revisionist under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was dismissed. The court observed that a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC even for the period after iddat and for her whole life unless she is disqualified for the reasons such as marriage with someone else.
Brief Facts:
The marriage/Nikah of the revisionist with opposite party No.2 had taken place in the year 2006 but she was harassed by the opposite party No.2 on account of dowry and later on she was divorced by the opposite party No.2 on 20.08.2009. The revisionist has not re-married so far. The revisionist along with her minor children had filed a case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance against the opposite party No.2 but the claim of the revisionist was rejected by the Court below vide impugned order by holding that a divorced Muslim woman is not entitled to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
Contentions of the Revisionist:
The Learned Counsel for the Revisionist argued that the impugned judgment and order is against the facts and law and thus liable to be set aside ― the claim of revisionist under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has been rejected merely on the said ground that she, being divorced wife, is not entitled ti maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C., which is against settled position of law.
Further, the counsel remarked that in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, which has been followed by this Court, a divorced Muslim wife is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. even after the iddat period, till she re-marries. It was also submitted that there is absolutely no such evidence that divorce between the parties took place by mutual consent or that she was residing separately by mutual consent.
Contentions of the opposite party:
The Learned Counsel for the opposite party opposed the revision and argued that the revisionist has filed the case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. making false and baseless allegations. Referring to the impugned judgment, it was submitted that the revisionist was divorced with the mutual consent of both parties and she is residing separately with mutual consent; thus, the revisionist is not entitled to any maintenance.
Further, the counsel contended that the allegations made by the revisionist are thoroughly false. Even before the divorce, she had been residing separately from her husband without any just cause. It was submitted that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order and thus, the revision is liable to be dismissed.
Observations of the Court:
The Court referred to the case of Shabana Bano v. Imran Khan (2010) 1 SCC 666, where it was held that a petition under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. filed by a divorced woman would be maintainable before the Family Court as long as the appellant does not remarry and the amount of maintenance to be awarded under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. cannot be restricted for the iddat period only.
The Court observed that it is clear that a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC even for the period after iddat and for her whole life unless she is disqualified for the reasons such as marriage with someone else.
The decision of the Court:
The Allahabad High Court, allowing the revision, held that the rejection of the application of revisionist under section 125 CrPC on the ground that, being a divorced Muslim woman, she is not entitled to seek maintenance under section 125 CrPC, is against the well-settled position of law and thus, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
Case Title: Smt. Shakila Khatun v State of U.P & Anr.
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Raj Beer Singh
Case no.: CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3573 of 2021
Advocate for the Revisionist: Mr. Chandra Bhushan Tiwari
Advocate for the Respondent: G.A., Vinayak Varma
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
