Shah Bano's Ghost

Often cases involving Muslim women are framed as a fight between secular and personal laws. In doing so, we Ignore larger, more interesting questions

- Shahrukh Alam

THE Supreme Court's recent judgment in Abdul Samad has been in the news, I suspect partly because it again provides an opportunity to media commentators to speak about how Muslim women need to be saved from their personal laws.

The SC has held that there are equivalent rights to maintenance available under the 'secular provision' of Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) of 1973 (Section 125), and the 'personal law provision' enacted in Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. Although the two provisions exist in parallel and distinct domains, either is available to Muslim women. The existence of personal law rights to maintenance does not debar Muslim women from also invoking the same right under Section 125 CrPC.

On cue, the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) passed a resolution disapproving the judgment.

The facts of the case involve a Muslim husband who unilaterally divorced his wife and paid her Rs 15,000 towards maintenance for the period of Iddat alone. The Iddat period comprises three months following a divorce when a divorced wife may not remarry, and was instituted to remove any potential doubts about paternity, etc. The severance between the former spouses is complete after Iddat.