Alimony is a right, not a charity, India’s Supreme Court said while ruling that divorced Muslim women are allowed to seek maintenance. Augustine George Masih and Justices BV Nagarathna disregard a Muslim man’s challenge to a state high court’s verdict demanding him to pay his former wife Rs 10,000 (£93.5) a month in alimony. The man, Mohd Abdul Samad, claimed that a divorced woman is not eligible for alimony under the Muslim Personal Law, which he said should prevail over secular law.
But the court said regardless of their religion, the right to seek maintenance under the country’s criminal code is a secular provision applicable to all married women. In southern Telangana state, a family court had directed Mr. Samad to pay alimony of Rs 20,000 (£187) per month to his previous wife after she filed a petition in 2017 claiming that he had divorced her under the instant divorce practice known as triple talaq.
The controversial practice recognized by certain schools of Islamic jurisprudence wants a man to merely say “talaq”, which is an Arabic word for divorce, three times to divorce his wife. In 2017 The Supreme Court stated the practice to be unlawful and violative of the essential rights of Muslim women. Mr. Samad said he divorced his wife by the prevailing Muslim Personal Law in 2017 and he has a divorce certificate to that effect but it was not considered by the family court. He went to the Telangana High Court, which declined to set aside the family’s court order but lessened the alimony amount to Rs 10,000.
Mr. Samad then moved to the Supreme Court where his lawyer argued that a divorced Muslim woman can seek recourse under the Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Divorce Act, 1986, which is part of the personal law governing matters of marriage, succession, inheritance, and charities for the minority community. But amicus curiae Gaurav Agarwal countered that the personal law does not take away a woman’s right to relief under the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court agreed. This right transcends financial security, and religious boundaries and reinforces the principle of gender equality for all married women. The court also emphasized the requirement for husbands to provide financial provisions to their wives. Among the practical measures, it recommended keeping joint bank accounts and sharing ATM access to maintain economic sustainability for women within the household.
