Danial Latifi v. Union of India (2001) 7 SCC 740

CASE NO.	868 0f 1986
DATE OF JUDGEMENT	28.09.2001
COURT	Supreme Court of India
PETITIONER	Danial Latifi & Others
RESPONDENT	Union of India
BENCH	G.B. Pattanaik, S. Rajendra Babu, D.P. Mohapatra, Doraiswamy Raju, Shivraj V. Patil.

Introduction – This case deals with the maintenance of a wife under which the constitutional validity of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce Act) is challenged in this case. Basically, the main reason behind this case is that does Muslim women are entitled to get the maintenance under the given section 125 of Criminal Procedure code. Under this case the validity of Muslim women is challenged that after taking maintenance during Iddat period, they are entitled to take maintenance.

Statutes Referred: – 

1. Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act,1986.
2. The Constitution of India.
3. The criminal procedure code 1973.

Cases Referred: –

1.  Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India 1978.
2. Mohammad Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano 1985.
3. Olga Tellis V. Bombay Municipal Corporation,1985 

Facts of the Case: –

In this case, after the case of Mohd. Ahmad khan v. shah Bano Begum 1985, the congress government brought the act named Muslim Women Protection Act 1986 and which was challenged under the Daniel Latifi case.

Issue Raised: –

  1.Constitutional validity of Muslim Women Protection Act, 1986 was challenged.

2. Does the husband only maintain her wife only during the iddat period.

Contention: –

1. The petitioner claimed that the Muslim women are also entitled to take maintenance under section 125 of Criminal procedure code 1973, if they do not receive a minimum satisfactory amount of maintenance during the period iddat.
2. The petitioner claimed that section 125 of crpc was made to provide the benefit to the divorce wife, considering article 21 of the Indian constitution which talks about protecting life and personal liberty.
3. It also finds that not providing maintenance to Muslim women under section 125 of Crpc would result in the discrimination between Muslim religion women and other religion women because they are entitled to take advantage under this section.
4. The remedies provided under section 125 will violate article 14,15 and 21 of the constitution if it would apply to the muslim women case.
5. According to the solicitor general it was stated that whatever challenge was made under this law was outside personal law.

Judgement: –

The Supreme Court held that section 3(1) (a) under which the husband can make arrangements for maintenance within the Iddat period, to enable the wife to get maintenance till she remarries. The term used “within the Period” stands for that the husband shall make the arrangements for the maintenance of her wife and it must be enough to maintain her whole life otherwise if he fails to so, her wife will claim maintenance under section 125 of criminal procedure code, 1973.

Conclusion: –

To be conclude here, so in this case it was clearly stated that the muslim women is also entitled to take maintenance under section 125 criminal procedure code of 1973 when their husband does not fulfil the above two conditions which states that the maintenance has to be paid during Iddat period but that maintenance should be enough to his wife during her lifetime otherwise if he fails to do so divorce women is entitled to take benefit under the section 125 of criminal procedure code.

Reference: –

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/410660/

https://lawplanet.in/danial-latifi-vs-union-of-india-case/

This Case Analysis is written by Somya Rajawat student of Maharani Laxmi Bai Arts and Commerce College Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh; Intern at Legal Vidhiya.