IndexIntroductionTimelineMajor Issues Related to the CaseCritical AnalysisIntroduction This was one of the most historic cases in the history of independent India, especially from the perspective of the Muslim community. He dealt with the extremely sophisticated issue of 'Triple Talaq'. It is the story of a courageous woman named Shah Bano who fought against her community and to seek justice. He gave an exemplary performance against his rigid community. It can be argued that he got justice late, but no one can deny the fact that he changed the system forever. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay First things first, what is Triple Talaq? Triple Talaq is a method of getting instant divorce used by Muslim man. All he has to do is say the word talaq 3 times in oral or written form. Electronic media will also do well. So, if a husband sends 3 whatsapp text messages to his wife stating talaq, well, divorce is done! As unfair as it may seem, it is written in the Quran, the definitive book followed by all Muslims around the world. Timeline 1932: Shah Bano was married to Mohammad Ahmad Khan. Later, Shah Bano became a mother of 3 sons and 2 daughters. 1946: Mohammad Ahmad Khan married another woman (according to Muslim law, a man can have up to four wives. However, a wife cannot have more than one husband). He lived for years with two wives, then kicked Shah Bano and his 5 children out of the house. By then he had turned 62. Apparently, he promised to pay her maintenance of Rs 200. April 1978: Shah Bano raised his voice against this injustice in a local court in Indore and she was entitled to be paid maintenance of Rs 500 per month. November 1978: Mohammad Ahmad Khan uttered the word Talaq 3 times to get rid of his wife and to escape this maintenance tax. Henceforth, it was no longer mandatory for him to pay Rs 500 per month as Shah Bano was no longer his wife. He only has to pay an amount of Rs 5400 in total as per Islamic law. August 1979: The local court ordered Mr. Khan to pay an amount of Rs 25 per month as maintenance. July 1980: On Shah Bano's fresh application, the MP High Court ordered Khan to pay an amount of Rs 179.20 per month. Mr Khan was obviously not satisfied with the verdict and approached the Supreme Court stating that Shah Bano is no longer his wife and therefore no longer his responsibility under Islamic law. The main issues related to the case Whether Section 125 which deals with maintenance of wives, children and parents is applicable or not. Whether the Uniform Civil Code is applicable to all religions or not. Supreme Court Ruling: On 3 February 1981, the Honorable Supreme Court of India passed a ruling in favor of Shah Bano. It was a unanimous decision. The Supreme Court has held that Section 125 applies to all Indian citizens irrespective of religion, caste or creed. According to the Supreme Court, Muslim personal law in this case was unjust as the wife is unable to support herself financially. Therefore, after a long proceeding, the Court concluded that the husband is not obliged to provide maintenance to the wife if she is able to provide for herself financially. However, if she is not competent, her husband cannot deny her maintenance. Community Response: As expected, the verdict received numerous protests from the Muslim community. The Indian press made it a national issue. They have been led to believe this by their religious leaders as a threat to their personal law and theexploitation of the right to religion. After all, the verdict was against the preaching of the Quran. This protest was led by All India Muslim Personal Law, an organization created to protect Muslim personal law. Reversal of ruling: General elections were held in 1984. Rajiv Gandhi won the elections with an absolute majority winning 414 out of 533 seats. Many Congress leaders warned Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi that if they did not overturn the Supreme Court verdict, they could face serious consequences in the next elections. After all, the Muslim vote bank has always been one of the pillars behind the stellar dominance of the Indian National Congress. In 1986 they introduced the Muslim Women Protection Act which mandated maintenance of divorced women only up to the period of 90 days or up to the period of iddat. This was clearly contrary to Section 125. Therefore, the judgment passed by the Supreme Court was governed by this act. Reactions to the act: This time the act has received a lot of criticism from many sections of the society. The act was opposed by the All India Democratic Women's Association (AIDWA). The BJP called it a “violation of the sanctity of the highest court of the land”. Makarand Paranjape considered it a non-secular activity. Critics have argued that divorce can be considered under personal laws, but maintenance cannot. It is one of the fundamental rights of a divorced woman. Excluding Muslim women from civil law is indeed discriminatory. Aftermath: On August 22, 2017, a 5-judge bench heard the triple talaq law. Of the 5 judges, 3 deemed the law unconstitutional. Two others held that it is constitutional, but the government should enact law to ban it. The BJP government led by Prime Minister Modi has drafted a bill called The Muslim Women Protection Bill 2017 and submitted it to our Parliament. It was finally passed in late December 2017. This bill not only makes triple talaq invalid but also illegal. The husband who gives triple talaq can be put in prison for a term of up to 3 years. Few parties like AIADMK, BJD, AIML, AIMIM opposed the bill stating it as a flawed proposal. However, the opposition leader Indian National Congress was in support of the bill. Muslim liberals and Hindu nationalists also opposed the practice. Critical Analysis Due to Mohd. Ahmad Khan V/S Shah Bano Begum, the Supreme Court particularly emphasized that Triple Talaq cannot take away the right to support of a separated Muslim woman who is unable to support herself or her children when she is abandoned or separated from his significant other. The period when the decision in the Shah Bano case was delivered by the Supreme Court faced considerable opposition. At that time, married or unmarried Muslim women were not given the opportunity. They have even been suspended from fundamental freedom, which is against humanity and essentially ignores the essential or fundamental rights of the person. Muslim women were in a backward position compared to other women in the world. They were not well educated and independent compared to other women. They faced major issues that led to the lowering of their level of self-confidence and knowledge in various areas. In addition to these things, they were not allowed to educate themselves or teach themselves and were similarly denied jobs as well. Since they have faced all these things since their youth, it was exceptionally characteristic that in their difficult times they are unable to earn a living and can support themselves, so for them sustenance or maintenance was truly.