Shah Bano Case (1985)
– Maintenance, Personal Law and Secular Law
Background of the Case
Shah Bano, a 62-year-old Muslim woman, was divorced by her husband Mohd. Ahmed Khan after over 40 years of marriage.
Having no independent means of livelihood, she:
- Approached the court under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
- Sought maintenance for her sustenance
Her husband contended that:
- Under Muslim personal law, his obligation ends after the iddat period
- He had already paid mahr (dower)
Core Legal and Constitutional Questions
- Does Section 125 CrPC apply to Muslims?
- Can personal law override a secular criminal law?
- Is mahr a substitute for maintenance?
Supreme Court’s Judgement
The Supreme Court upheld the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court and ruled decisively in favour of Shah Bano.
(a) Section 125 CrPC Is Secular and Universal
The Court held that:
- Section 125 CrPC is a secular provision
- It applies to all religions and communities
Therefore → In case of conflict, secular law prevails over personal law.
(b) Maintenance Beyond Iddat Period
The Court ruled that:
- A Muslim husband is liable to pay maintenance even beyond the iddat period
- If the divorced wife is unable to maintain herself
This interpretation aligned maintenance with:
- Social justice
- Protection of women’s dignity
(c) Mahr Is Not a Substitute for Maintenance
The Court clarified that:
- Mahr (dower) is a one-time marital obligation
- It does not absolve the husband from:
- Ongoing duty of maintenance under Section 125 CrPC
(d) Observation on Uniform Civil Code
The Court made a significant observation:
- A Uniform Civil Code (Article 44) would:
- Promote national integration
- Remove conflicts arising from divergent personal laws
Though obiter, this remark intensified public debate.
Impact of the Judgement
(a) Legislative Response – 1986 Act
The judgment led to a strong political reaction, resulting in → Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986
This Act:
- Limited the husband’s liability to the iddat period
- Effectively overturned the Shah Bano judgment
(b) Judicial Reconciliation – Danial Latifi Case (2001)
In Danial Latifi vs. Union of India (2001), the Supreme Court:
- Upheld the constitutional validity of the 1986 Act
- Interpreted it harmoniously to hold that:
- The husband must make a reasonable and fair provision
- For the future of the divorced wife beyond iddat
Thus, in substance → Maintenance obligation continues, though paid upfront.
Constitutional and Social Significance
This case:
- Affirmed secular character of criminal law
- Highlighted tension between personal law and gender justice
- Revived debate on Uniform Civil Code
- Demonstrated judicial commitment to social reform, followed by legislative pushback
Place in Constitutional Evolution
| Dimension | Contribution |
|---|---|
| Women’s rights | Strengthened |
| Personal law | Subject to constitutional values |
| Secularism | Reinforced |
| UCC debate | Revived |
Summary
The Shah Bano Case (1985) held that Section 125 CrPC applies to all religions, required a Muslim husband to pay maintenance beyond iddat, sparked a national debate on Uniform Civil Code, and was later legislatively diluted but judicially reconciled in Danial Latifi (2001).