Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 309 (PAT)

Md. Tahir v. State Of Bihar

2007-02-09

MADHAVENDRA SARAN

body2007
Judgment 1. This application u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short as Code) has been filed for quashing the order dated 11.2.2005 passed by Shri A.K. Sinha, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Katihar in maintenance case no. 75/04 by which he has allowed interim maintenance u/s 125 of the Code and has directed the petitioner/Opposite Party to pay Rs. 400.00 per month to the child and Rs. 600.00 per month to the wife, i.e., complainant, Bibi Sabnam Ara. 2. The case of O.R No. 2/wife is that she was married to petitioner Md. Tahir on 13.5.1993. At the time of marriage certain cash and articles were given. Their married life started on good notes and out of wedlock she gave birth to a boy on 3.6.94. It is said that subsequently in laws started making demand and due to its non-fulfilment she was subjected to torture. It became difficult for her to live properly with her minor son. In the year 1999 she was ousted from the house. She went to her fathers place. Panchayati was held to resolve the matter but it could not succeed. Her husband went for second marriage also. 3. The case of petitioner/husband in short is that he gave divorce to Bibi Sabnam on 26.10.2004 and so after divorce their relationship was dissolved. 4. It has been submitted that as per Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act ( in short as Act) the petitioner is liable to pay maintenance for three months and ten days from the date of divorce only to his wife and nothing beyond that. He further submitted that so far as minor son is concerned, in the light of order dated 11.2.2005 the petitioner has sent Rs. 1200.00 by Money-Order in the name of Master Raunaaque Tahir C/o Bibi Sabnam Ara on 7.4.2005. Learned counsel pointed out that order of ad interim maintenance in favour of the wife is not proper in view of provisions of the Act. 5. Learned counsel for the OP. No. 2/wife submitted that divorced woman is entitled to maintenance from her husband even after the period of Iddat and this issue has been finally settled by the Apex Court in the case of Daniel Latifi vs. Union of India reported in (2001)7 SCC 740 . 6. 5. Learned counsel for the OP. No. 2/wife submitted that divorced woman is entitled to maintenance from her husband even after the period of Iddat and this issue has been finally settled by the Apex Court in the case of Daniel Latifi vs. Union of India reported in (2001)7 SCC 740 . 6. The Apex Court in the case of Daniel Latifi vs. Union of India while holding the validity of the Act made the following observations: (i) A Muslim husband is liable to make reasonable and fair provision for the future of the divorced wife which obviously includes her maintenance as well, such a reasonable and fair provision extending beyond the Iddat period must be made by the husband within the Iddat period in terms of Sec.3(1)(a) of the Act. (ii) Liability of a Muslim husband to his divorced wife arising u/s 3(1)(a) of the Act to pay maintenance is not confined to the Iddat period. (iii) A divorced Muslim woman who has not remarried and who is not able to maintain herself after the Iddat period can proceed as provided u/s 4 of the Act against her relatives who are liable to maintain her in proportion to the properties which they inherit on her death according to Muslim law from such divorced woman including her children and parents. If any of the relatives being unable to pay maintenance, the Magistrate may direct the State Wakf Board established under the Act to pay such maintenance. (iv) The provision of the Act do not offend Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution of India. 7. Thus, a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to a fair reasonable provision for her future being made by her former husband which must include maintenance for future extending beyond the iddat period. A Muslim woman before divorce is entitled to maintenance u/s 125 of the Act. After marriage it is duty of the husband to provide shelter and maintenance to his wife and children. If he neglects, wife and children are entitled to have it from court by filing petition. In an application for grant of interim maintenance summary enquiry is only required. It appears from the impugned order that the learned Magistrate after hearing both the parties allowed the prayer of act interim maintenance in favour of wife and child. If he neglects, wife and children are entitled to have it from court by filing petition. In an application for grant of interim maintenance summary enquiry is only required. It appears from the impugned order that the learned Magistrate after hearing both the parties allowed the prayer of act interim maintenance in favour of wife and child. Interim maintenance is always subject to final adjudication of the main petition and also can be revised. Present matter before the court below is at the preliminary stage and hence, at this stage, no interference is required by this court. 8. In the above facts and circumstances, this application is dismissed. 9. The stay granted by this court on 28.2.2006 is hereby vacated.