Recently, the Supreme Court appointed amicus curiae to assist in determining whether a Family Court can grant permanent alimony to a Muslim woman whose marriage has been dissolved under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, and if such alimony can be modified upon her remarriage. Recognizing the legal significance of these issues, the Court sought expert assistance.
The matter arose from an appeal against the Gujarat High Court's order upholding a Family Court’s decision to grant a decree of divorce to a Muslim woman, along with a lump sum permanent maintenance of Rs. 10,00,000. The Family Court's decision was based on the principles laid down in Danial Latifi & Anr v. Union of India, wherein the Supreme Court had held that a Muslim husband is obligated to make a reasonable and fair provision for his divorced wife, encompassing her future maintenance.
The Gujarat High Court, after extensively reviewing the status of Muslim women and relevant legal precedents, refused to modify the Family Court’s order despite learning of the woman’s remarriage.
The petitioner, the ex-husband, challenged the High Court’s decision, contending that permanent alimony granted under the Family Court’s order should cease upon the remarriage of the wife. He argued that under the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, a Muslim woman is entitled to maintenance only during the Iddat period and, in cases where she remains unmarried and unable to maintain herself, after the Iddat period. The petitioner further emphasized that awarding lifetime alimony contradicts established Islamic principles and statutory provisions.
The Supreme Court, acknowledging the complexity of the legal questions involved, directed the parties to submit the Mohd. Abdul Samad v. State of Telangana judgment, which recognized that Muslim women could seek maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC. The Court also examined the ruling in Danial Latifi, where it was held that a Muslim husband must provide for his divorced wife’s future within the Iddat period.
The divisional bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra noted that the Family Courts Act, 1984, has an overriding effect on all other enactments and extends to all communities, including Muslims. The bench remarked, "The Family Court has jurisdiction over matrimonial matters, including maintenance disputes arising out of the dissolution of marriage under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939. The scope of permanent alimony and its modification upon remarriage is a question that requires careful legal scrutiny."
The Gujarat High Court had concluded that permanent alimony is an integral component of the dissolution of marriage and is not subject to modification upon remarriage unless expressly stipulated. The bench stated, "A decree for dissolution obtained under the 1939 Act is a legal divorce under Muslim law. Consequently, the divorced wife is entitled to reasonable and fair provision under Section 3 of the 1986 Act. The provision for permanent alimony is incidental to the grant of divorce and must be adjudicated in line with statutory provisions and judicial precedents."
Considering the far-reaching implications of the issue, the Apex Court appointed Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave as amicus curiae to provide legal assistance. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on April 15, 2025, where the Court will deliberate on the extent of a Family Court’s authority to grant and modify permanent alimony in such cases.
Picture Source :
