Jharkhand High Court
Hasmuddin Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand on 2 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 611 of 2006
-------
Hasmuddin Ansari ...... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Sajda Khatoon ..... .... Opp. Parties
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
--------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashish Verma, Amicus
For the State : Mr. Tapas Roy, A.P.P.
For the Opp.Party No.2 : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate
--------
13/ Dated 02.05.2023
Heard Mr. Ashish Verma, learned Amicus on behalf of the petitioner, Mr.
Tapas Roy, learned A.P.P on behalf of the State and Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha,
learned counsel for the opposite party No.2.
The petitioner Hasmuddin Ansari has challenged the legality, correctness
and proprietary of the order dated 12.07.2006 passed by Sri Shri Prakash Rai,
learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi in Maintenance Case No.91/2004,
whereby and wherein, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi directed
the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- per month to the opposite party No.2
Sajda Khatoon as maintenance in an application filed under Section 125 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.
Mr. Ashish Verma, learned Amicus Curiae appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had divorced the opposite party No.2
prior to the filing of the maintenance case and as such, the impugned order passed
by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi was against the settled
principle of law as the divorced Muslim woman was not entitled for maintenance.
It was submitted on behalf of the Opp.Party No.2 that it is a settled
principle of law that even a divorced Muslim lady is entitled to maintenance till
she is re-marries.
Reliance has been placed upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India reported in Iqbal Bano Vs. State of U.P. & Anr. in (2007) 6 SCC 785
and Vijay Kumar Prasad Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. (2004) 5 SCC 196, where
the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that an application under Section 125 of the
Cr.P.C filed by a divorced Muslim woman would be maintainable before the
Family Court as long as the wife 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 main thrust of the argument on behalf of the petitioner is that he had
divorced the opposite party No.2 Sajda Khatoon and as such, the order of the
learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi directing him to pay Rs.2,000/- per
month to his wife under Section 125 Cr.P.C., was illegal.
Whether a divorced Muslim women can be granted maintenance under
section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure is no more res-integra.
Through its various decisions, Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, has 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 wife does not remarry.
Relying on the aforesaid judgments, the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in
Cr. Revision No.2509 of 2014 allowed an application filed by the divorced
Muslim woman under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C and held that the maintenance of
a divorced Muslim woman was not restricted only till the period of iddat.
A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Revision No.602 of 2006 has held
that a petition under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C filed by a divorced Muslim woman
would be maintainable before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court as long
as the wife does not remarry. This being a beneficial piece of legislation, the
benefit thereof must accrue to the divorced Muslim women also.
Considering the present position of law, I do not find any illegality in the
order of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi directing the petitioner
to pay Rs.2,000/- per month to his divorced wife as maintenance under the
provision of Section 125 of the Cr.P.C.
This revision application is dismissed.
Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.
Before parting, I will like to record my deep sense of appreciation for
Mr. Ashish Verma, learned Amicus Curiae who has very ably assisted this Court
in this case. The Member Secretary, JHALSA is directed to pay Rs.5,000/-
(Rupees Five Thousand) to Mr. Ashish Verma, learned Amicus Curiae for his
services rendered as Amicus Curiae.
BS/ (Ambuj Nath, J.)
