Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum & Ors. (1985)

AIR 1985 SC 945 | (1985) 2 SCC 556 | 1985 SCR (3) 844 — Supreme Court of India (5-Judge Bench)

“Can a divorced Muslim woman claim maintenance under a secular criminal-law provision, or does personal law have the final word?”

01 | MEET THE PARTIES

Mohd. Ahmed Khan (Petitioner / Husband) An advocate practising in Indore, married to the respondent in 1932.

Shah Bano Begum (Respondent / Wife) Housewife for over 43 years of marriage; mother of five children; 62 years old at the time of the dispute.

02 | WHAT HAPPENED? (FACTS)

• In 1975, Khan drove Shah Bano out of the matrimonial home without notice or financial provision.
• In April 1978, she filed a petition under Section 125 CrPC before the Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Indore, seeking maintenance of Rs 500 per month.
• On 6 November 1978, Khan pronounced an irrevocable talaq and argued he had ceased to be liable, having paid mahr and iddat maintenance.
• The Magistrate awarded Rs 25/month; the Madhya Pradesh High Court enhanced it to Rs 179.20/month; Khan appealed to the Supreme Court.

03 | THE BIG LEGAL QUESTION

• Does Section 125 CrPC apply to Muslims, or is it excluded by Muslim personal law?
• Is a divorced Muslim woman a “wife” within the meaning of Section 125 CrPC?
• Does payment of mahr and iddat maintenance discharge the husband’s liability under Section 125?

04 | WHAT DID THE COURT DECIDE?

A 5-Judge Bench (Chandrachud, C.J., Misra, Desai, Chinnappa Reddy and Venkataramiah, JJ.) unanimously dismissed Khan’s appeal and upheld Shah Bano’s right to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC beyond the iddat period, so long as she remained unable to maintain herself and had not remarried.

05 | WHY DID THE COURT THINK SO?

Section 125 CrPC is a secular provision of general application; the Explanation to the second proviso of Section 125(3)/127(3)(b) exempts a husband only where a sum has actually been paid under personal law “in lieu of” such maintenance. Mahr, being a token of respect payable on marriage rather than a sum intended for sustenance after divorce, does not qualify. Where the two systems conflict, the secular statute prevails.

06 | THE GOLDEN RULE (RATIO DECIDENDI)

Section 125 CrPC applies to all citizens irrespective of religion. A divorced Muslim wife who is unable to maintain herself is entitled to maintenance beyond the iddat period; mahr and iddat maintenance do not, without more, discharge that obligation.

07 | WHY THIS CASE MATTERS TODAY

The starting point of India’s modern maintenance jurisprudence for minority women; triggered the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 and remains central to the Uniform Civil Code debate under Article 44; directly relied upon in Danial Latifi (2001) and Mohd. Abdul Samad (2024).

08 | CASE TIMELINE

1975	Husband drives wife out of matrimonial home
April 1978	Petition filed before JMFC, Indore
1978	MP High Court enhances maintenance on revision
23 April 1985	Supreme Court judgment (5-Judge Bench)
1986	Parliament enacts the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act

09 | COMPARE IT WITH ANOTHER LANDMARK CASE

Danial Latifi v. Union of India (2001) 7 SCC 740 — tested the constitutionality of the very statute Parliament passed to counter this judgment.

10 | RELEVANT PROVISIONS

Section 125 & 127(3)(b), CrPC 1973 (now Sections 144 & 146, BNSS 2023); Articles 14, 15, 21 & 44, Constitution of India; Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937.

11 | KEY LEGAL TERMS

Mahr (dower) ● Iddat ● Secular law ● Personal law ● Uniform Civil Code ● Vagrancy

12 | EXAM MEMORY HACK

“Mahr is a mark of respect, not maintenance.” Section 125 is secular — no community can opt out of it by personal law alone.

13 | POSSIBLE EXAM QUESTIONS

Short Answer: What did the Court hold regarding mahr and maintenance in the Shah Bano case?

Long Answer: Discuss the significance of Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum in the secular-versus-personal-law debate.

Problem-Based: A Muslim husband argues that payment of mahr fully discharges his maintenance liability to his divorced wife. Advise her, with reference to Shah Bano.

14 | TARAJU TAKEAWAY

Shah Bano established that a divorced Muslim woman’s right to maintenance under secular criminal law survives personal-law limitations — the foundation stone for every maintenance judgment concerning Muslim women that followed.