User:Hpsatapathy/sandbox

Maintenance under Hindu & Muslim Laws in India

Introduction
Maintenance mainly refers to the economic support given to someone who is unable to earn livelihood independently.The whole concept of maintenance was introduced in order to see that if there is a spouse who is not independent financially then the other spouse should help him/her in order to make the living of the other person possible and independent. According to my understanding maintenance not only includes basic necessities like food, clothing and residence but it also includes the things necessary for comfort and status in which the person entitled is reasonably expected to live. According to me the main aim of providing maintenance is that the wife should not be left destitute on separation or divorce from her husband. According to Halsburry's Law of England, maintenance is the name given to the weekly or monthly payments which may be ordered on a decree of divorce, or nullity to be made for the maintenance of and support of the wife during the joint lives of the spouses,maintenance of the children is a similar provision for their benefit ,which may be made in proceedings for divorce,nullity,judicial separation or restitution of conjugal rights.

Section 3(b) of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act,1956 defines maintenance. According to it maintenance includes (i) in all cases, provision for food,clothing,residence,education and medical attendance and treatment;(ii) in the case of an unmarried daughter also the reasonable expenses of and incident to her marriage.

A person becomes liable for maintenance under three categories :-
 * Liabilty for either spouse
 * From being a relative;and
 * Liabilty for blood relations

Thus a person has personal obligation to maintain his/her spouse, chidren and aged parents. Under Hindu Law, the wife has an absolute right to claim maintenance from her husband. But she loses her right if she deviates from the path of chastity.The most important aspect of maintenance is that the party which relies on maintenance has no independent source of income to support himself/herself. The persons who are entitled to maintenance under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 are wife, widowed daughter-in-law, children, aged parents and dependants as enumerated in Section 21 of the Act. Whereas, under the Muslim law, the persons entitled to maintenance are wife, young children, the necessitous parents, and other necessitous relations within the prohibited degrees.And under Hindu marriage Act either of spouse are entitled for maintenance.

Conclusion
Maintenance under the Section 125 of CrPC: We have gone through three Acts which provide specific provisions for specific religions but section- 125 of CrPC provides the same remedy for all the religions across India like non-Hindu Parsi, Christian and Muslims and Hindu as well. It should be kept in view that the provisions relating to maintenance under any personal law are distinct and separate. There is no conflict between the two provisions. A wife whether Mohammedan or non-Mohammedan is entitled to claim maintenance against the husband u/s125 of the CrPC 1973. A person may sue for maintenance u/s.125 of Cr.P.C. If a person has already obtained maintenance order under personal law, the magistrate may take that into consideration while fixing the quantum of maintenance under this Code. But this should not be out of his jurisdiction. The basis of the relief, under the concerned section is the refusal or negligence to maintain his wife, children, father or mother by a person who has sufficient means to maintain them. The criterion is not whether a person is actually having means, but if he is capable of earning he will be considered to have sufficient means. The burden of proof is on him to show that he has no sufficient means to maintain and to provide maintenance. Under CrPC, only wife (a woman who has been divorced by or has obtained divorce from her husband & hasn’t remarried) can claim for maintenance.A wife who refuses to stay with her husband due to legal grounds such as (bigamy, cruelty & adultery) has the right to special allowance under this act. But a wife does not possess right to claim maintenance if she’s living in adultery or she’s living separately by mutual consent. The various sections of CrPC are criminal in nature and are used for criminal charges. The Section 125 of the CrPC states the provisions as follows: “Section-125- Order for maintenance of wives, children and parents. (1) If any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain- (a) His wife, unable to maintain herself, or (b) His legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself, or (c) His legitimate or illegitimate child (not being a married daughter) who has attained majority, where such child is, by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury unable to maintain itself, or, (d) His father or mother, unable to maintain himself or herself” In this section it is found that the magistrate has the power to give the maintenance from the date of the order and he gives the allowance from the date of filing the application then he has to give reasons as to why he/she is giving the maintenance from the date of the application. A magistrate of the first class may, upon proof of such negligence or refusal, order such person to make a monthly allowance for the maintenance of his wife or such child, father or mother, at such monthly rate not exceeding five hundred rupees in the whole, as such Magistrate thinks fit, and to pay the same to such person as the Magistrate may from time to time direct Provided that the Magistrate may order the father of a minor female child referred to in clause (b) to make such allowance, until she attains her majority, if the Magistrate is satisfied that the husband of such minor female child, if married, is not possessed of sufficient means. Under sub-section 3 of section 125 provides two modes of maintenance order: (i) Issue warrant for levying fines, (ii) Sentence such person to imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or until payment if sooner made,if after the execution of warrant  the whole or any part or month's allowance remains unpaid. Anirudha Mishra v. Dr. Sujata AIR 2004 Orissa 1:In this case it was held that where interim maintenance was ordered and later on it was found that wife was earning more than the husband, interim maintenance was cancelled on the ground that she was able to maintain herself. Maintenance under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 Wherein under HMA,1955 it provided maintenance of wife and husband but under HAMA,1956  it is quite wide and  includes wife ,infirm parents ,child, daughter in law and childless stepmother. Sections 18 to 28 of this Act provide provisions for maintenance. Under the section 18(1) of the HAMA, 1956 wife is entitled to maintenance by her husband for lifetime i.e. she will be given maintenance until she dies or her husband dies. Under section 18 of this Act a Hindu wife is entitled to live separately from her husband without forfeiting her right to claim maintenance. The grounds under which she can live separately are:- (1)If the husband is guilty of desertion (2) If her husband has treated her with cruelty (3)If the husband is suffering from a virulent form of leprosy (4)If he has any other wife living. (5) If husband keeps a concubine elsewhere (6) If he has ceased to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion and (7) if there is any other cause justifying living separately But there are two bars which will prevent a wife from claiming maintenance from her husband i.e. (i) if she is unchaste or (ii) if she ceases to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion. Other dependents who can claim maintenance u/s – 19 and 20 Apart from the relationship of husband and wife other relations in which there is economic dependence are also considered to be entitled to maintenance by the HAMA,1956. ( i ) Accordingly a widowed daughter-in-law is entitled maintenance from her father-in-law to the extent of the share of her deceased husband in the said property. ( ii ) The minor children of a Hindu, whether legitimate or illegitimate, are entitled to claim maintenance from their parents. ( iii ) The aged and infirm parents of a Hindu are entitled to claim maintenance from their children. ( iv) Parents also includes an issueless stepmother. Sections 21 and 22 of this Act say about dependants and their maintenance. Under section 23(2) while determinig the amount of maintenance to be awarded to wife, childern or aged or infirm parents the followings to be considerd:- (a) The position and status of the parties. (b) The reasonable wants of the claimant (c) If the claimant is living separately, whether the claimant is justified in doing so, (d) The value of the claimant’s property and any income derived from such property, or from the claimant's own earnings or from any other source. (e) The number of persons entitled to maintenance under this Act. Section 23 (3) In determining the amount of maintenance, if any, to be awarded to a dependant under this Act,regard shall be had to (a) The net value of the estate of the deceased after providing for the payment of his debts. (b) The provisions, if any, made under a will of the deceased in respect of the dependant. (c) The degree of relationship between the two. (d) The reasonable wants of the dependant. (e) The past relations between the dependant and the deceased. (f) The value of the property of the dependant and any income derived from such property, or from his or her earnings or from any other source. (g) The number of dependants entitled to maintenance under this Act. The court awards maintenance to the wife taking various factors into consideration like status and position of the parties, wife’s wants, the value of wife’s property and income if any, derived from that property and the number of persons entitled to maintenance. The section says that the maintenance is given on the basis of the degree of relation between the two partners. In Rohin Kumari v. Narendra Singh AIR 1972SC 459 the Supreme Court held that if the husband calls upon his wife to return to him and if she does not reurn she still claim maintenance fro him u/s18(2)(d) of this Act. MAINTENANCE UNDER HINDU `MARRIAGE ACT 1955 There are two types of maintenance under this Act. (1) Interim Maintenance and Maintenance Pendente lite (2) Permanent Maintenance (1)   The Interim Maintenance is payable from the date of presentation of the petition till the date of dismissal of the suit or passing of the decree. Interim maintenance is supposed to meet the immediate needs of the petitioner. And maintenance pendente lite is for providing the litigation expenses to the claimant. Interim maintenance is the amount that is paid by the financially independent spouse to their counterpart during the pendency of the proceedings in the matrimonial cause and which covers the expenses of the proceedings as well as the other expenses of the spouse during the course of the proceedings.The basis of the claim for interim maintenance is that the claimant has no independent income of his/her own to support himself/herself. The provision is silent on the quantum of maintenance and it is upon the discretion of the court to determine the quantum.

(2) Permanent Alimony or Maintenance, on the other hand, is the maintenance that is paid by one spouse to the other after the judicial proceedings have resulted in either the dissolution of the marriage or a judicial separation. Section 25 of the act talks about permanent maintenance. It states how the court can order the respondent to pay the applicant for her or his maintenance a gross sum or a monthly or periodical sum for a term not exceeding the life of the applicant unless there are changes in circumstances under which the court can change its order.

Sections 24 and 25 of tht Hindu Marriage Act 1955, provide interim maintenance and permanent maintenence respectively. The payment for maintenance of the spouse during the pendency of the proceeding in matrimonial case is called interim maintenance.It includes (i)personal maintenance of the claimant;and(ii)expenses of the proceedings. Prior to maintenance the marriage of two Hindus has to be valid marriage as per the hindu law. And there are certain conditions to be followed after marriage for the maintenance. And the right to maintenance is not a transferable right. The right of maintenance under Hindu law is very old and it was one of the basic necessities of the joint family system. According to my understanding the maintenance of the women in the joint family system was an important system and this was followed as a tradition which governed the families. It was the obligation of the head of the family (karta) to look after the women of the family i.e. their wives and their daughters until they were married. Later when the women grew older it was the duty of their children to mantain their mother and other old women of the family. The unchastity on part of the women disentitles them from maintenance. Their re-marriage ends the claim of maintenance. Under section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act 1955,either spouse is entitled to maintenance. If the husband or the wife has no sufficient income for his/her living can file for maintenance. Each can claim for maintenance against the other. Either of the parties will bear the cost of expenses of the proceedings. It can be in the mode of ( i ) Gross Sum ( ii ) Monthly sum What is to be considered while granting interim maintenance :- (i) the status of the parties to marriage (ii) self income of the claimant (iii) income of the respondent (iv) Conduct of the parties (v) Other circumstances of the parties (vi) Conditions of immovable property of respondent (vii) Other properties of the applicant (viii) Number of persons required to be maintained

Captain Ramesh Chander v. Vijaya Kaushal AIR 1978 SC 1807 is the leading case u/s 24 of this Act.In this case the SC held that the direction by the Civil Court is not a final determination under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act but an order pendent lite u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act to pay expenses of the proceedings and monthly during proceeding such sum as having regard to the petitioners own income and the income of the respondent if the Court thinks it reasonable. While considering the application for maintenance pendent lite, the only consideration before the court is inability of the spouse to maintain herself or himself for want of financial means and not the misconduct of applicant spouse. Interim maintenance has to be granted considering the income of the husband and if no evidence is produced either by wife or husband, benefit of doubt has to be in favour of wife and income stated by wife has to be accepted. Permanent alimony is given to a spouse after a decree of judicial separation has been obtained.The question of permanent alimony arises in a case where a matrimonial dispute is decided by the court againt the party to marriage.It can only be granted when a decree for divorce has been granted not when the petition of divorce is dismissed.When the marriage is proved to be illegal then the  wifw has no right to maintenance u/s 25 of this Act. If there is a change in the circumstances of either party after the ordre is made u/sub-section (1)th eorder can be varied,modified or rescinded by the court under the following circumstances :- (i)    when the party in whose favour an order is made has remarried;or (ii)  if such party is the wife,she has not remarried chaste;or (iii) if such party is the husband,he had sexual intercourse with any woman outside wed-lock Ira Das vrs. Rameh Ranjan Mallick, AIR2003 Orissa 62 In this case it was held that while determining the quantum of permanent alimony the income of the husband has to be kept in mind. Maintenance under Muslim Law – The Muslim Women (Protection of rights on divorce)Act,1986 Under Muslim Personal Law the term maintenance in its literal sense means what a person spends over his family and in its legal sense it signifies and includes three things :(i) food,(ii) clothing and (iii) lodging Muslim Law passively considers male to be superior to woman. It is believed that a man can take care of himself whereas the woman cannot, in other words it is deduced that a woman cannot be self reliant. Hence, in Muslim law the wife has been bestowed with an absolute right to be maintained and the husband is bound to maintain her regardless of the fact whether she is poor or not. Wife’s right to maintenance is a debt against the husband. According to Muslim Law only these persons are entitled to maintenance who are indigent and necessitous and are unable to earn their livelihood. Under Muslim Law the following persons are entitled to maintenance:- 1.	Wife 2.	Children 3.	Parents and grandparents, and 4.	Other relations/Persons within prohibited relationship Husband's obligation to maintain his wife arises in the following two circumstances:- 1.	On account of status arising out of a valid marriage, and 2.	On account of pre-nuptial agreement entered between the parties to marriage or between the parents in case both the parties or one of them is a minor. Nonetheless, the wife does not lose the right to maintenance if she refuses access to her husband on legal grounds such as her illness or if the marriage cannot be consummated i.e. cannot be concluded by the sexual intercourse because of her old age, illness, his minority or faulty organ. However if the wife being too young for sexual intercourse, lives with her parents, she does not possess any right for maintenance. Muslim law provides provisions for the right to maintenance if the wife stays separately due to cruel behaviour or non-payment of prompt dower. But a wife cannot claim any maintenance during widowhood or Iddat because of her entitlement to inheritance. The right to maintenance of Muslim sons is governed by CrPC 1973 and Muslim women act, 1986 for Muslim daughters. The Muslim children are entitled to maintenance for the period till they attain majority or are able to maintain themselves (Section 125, CrPC). In case of daughters, they possess the right to maintenance till they get married. The parents are entitled to maintenance on the fulfilment of the following conditions:- 1.	The maintainer should be in easy circumstances and 2.	The claimant should be poor. After the historic judgment of the Shah Bano case, what followed the judgment were the critics of the outcome of the judgment of the impact of the judgment on the Muslim personal law. According to the Muslim community if this judgment was accepted in that case then the personal law was suppressed and was superseded by the Hindu law which allowed the women’s right to maintenance life long as there was no iddat period in the Hindus. According to The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce )Act,1956 a Muslim women is to be awarded maintenance by her husband only during the iddat period and not after that. But in case if she is financially not independent and needs maintenance then in that case her relatives who would get the share of her property will award her with maintenance. In the scenario where she does not have any such relatives than the State Waqf Board has to pay her the maintenance. So in a way the personal law of the Muslims was saved and the new law prevented any conflict between the two major communities of the country. The divorced wife is also entitled to unpaid dower and all such properties which were given to her during her marriage by her husband, his relatives, friends or her relatives. She also has an option to use the Sections 125-128 of the CrPC, 1973. Finally the cases pending under the provisions Sec. 125-127 shall be disposed by the Magistrate. Section3(1)(a) of Muslim Women(Protection of Rights on Divorce)Act 1986 says that a divorced woman shall be entitled to a reasonable and fair provision and maintenance to be made and paid to her within the Iddat period by her former husband, Section 3(1)(d) of this Act says that a divorced wife is entitled to all the properties given to her before or at the time of marriage or after her by her relatives or friends or the husband or any relation of the husband or his friends. Smt.Jaitunbi Mubarak v. Mubarak Fakruddin Shaikh,1999 CrLJ 3846 In this case it was held that a divorced muslim woman who has not remarried and is unable to maintain herself after iddat period,either relatives of divorced wife or in absence or inability, State Waqf Board is liable to pay maintenance. Syed Iqbql Hussain v. Syed Nasemunnissa Begum 1991(3) Crimes 678 (AP) It was held that the minor children are entitled to maintenance till they attain majority or are married as the case may be or whichever is earlier. Under Muslim Personal Law the wife is entitled to maintenance till the completion of iddat period. Similarly, Son- till he attains puberty but subject to his unability and disability Daughter- till her marriage.But if unmarried daughter lives separately cannot claim maintenance unless circumstances justify her separate living. Widow/divorced daughter- if she is unable to maintain herself can claim maintenance. Illegitimate child is not entitled to maintenance under Muslim Personal Law.But the father is under an obligation to maintain his illegitimate children u/s-125 of CrPC. Under Muslim Personal Law the children are bound to maintain their necessitous parents and grand parents. A muslim is under no obligation to maintain his daughter-in-law even if she is widow and incapable of supporting herself.

Maintenance of Muslim Women under Section 125 of the CrPC, 1973 Section 125 of the CrPC is basically secular in nature. Due to the secular nature of this Act this does not affect the personal laws and also the personal laws do not affect this section. If any Muslim woman seeks compensation under the section 125 and she will be awarded maintenance by the respected Court only if she is not remarried. “If the wife exercises her right under the Muhammadan Law and refuses to live with her husband on the ground of non-payment of dower, cannot enforce her right to maintenance under this act.” The Muslim women in case she is granted maintenance, it will be in the form of the monthly allowances. In the Mohd Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, (1985) 2 S.C.C 556, there was a Muslim women who was divorced by her husband when she was 68 years old and was the mother of five children. She filled a case in the court for granting of maintenance by the court. She was given maintenance by the Supreme Court under section 125 of the CrPC even after the iddat period was over. Under the Muslim personal law a divorced women could be awarded maintenance only during the iddat period and not latter. In case if she wants maintenance than she will have to be given maintenance by the other relatives according to the Muslim personal law. This judgment of awarding maintenance to Muslim women under section 125 of the CrPC which is a secular section of the law was widely critised by the Muslim community throughout the country. The Supreme Court had its following judgment in the case: “The Supreme Court of India mitigated the effect of Muslim laws that limited the maintenance payable to a divorcée. It held that, regardless of any previous payment of maintenance by a divorced man to his former wife during her iddat period and payment of her mahr, a former wife could still seek additional maintenance from her ex-husband under Section 125 of the CrPC, which permits courts to order maintenance payments for financially destitute women. In its decision, the Court quoted certain passages from the Qur'an in support of the position that a divorced man has an obligation to materially support his former wife. This decision triggered massive protests amongst conservative Muslim Indians, who viewed the decision as a deliberate attempt to undermine "their" personal laws and were outraged that a secular court tried to support its decision with references to the Qur'an. Fundamentalist Muslim leaders even pressured Shah Bano, to withdraw her support for the Court's decision in her favor. Despite acclaim for the decision from women's rights advocates, including from some Muslim women's groups, many Muslim leaders lobbied for legislation to overturn the Court's decision. As a result, without any consultation with either women's groups or moderate Muslim leaders, the national government hastily passed the Muslim Women Act of 1986, which limited a Muslim man's duty to pay maintenance to his former wife to her iddat period.” LEADING CASES 1. In the Mohd Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, (1985) 2 S.C.C 556, there was a Muslim woman who was divorced by her husband when she was 68 years old and was the mother of five children. She filed a case in the court for granting of maintenance by the court. She was given maintenance by the Supreme Court under section 125 of the CrPC even after the iddat period was over. Under the Muslim personal law a divorced woman could be awarded maintenance only during the iddat period and not later. In case she wants maintenance she will have to be given maintenance by the other relatives according to the Muslim personal law. This judgment of awarding maintenance to Muslim women under section 125 of the CrPC which is a secular section of the law was widely criticised by the Muslim community throughout the country. The Supreme Court had its following judgment in the case: “The Supreme Court of India mitigated the effect of Muslim laws that limited the maintenance payable to a divorcée. It held that, regardless of any previous payment of maintenance by a divorced man to his former wife during her iddat period and payment of her mahr, a former wife could still seek additional maintenance from her ex-husband under Section 125 of the CrPC, which permits courts to order maintenance payments to financially destitute women. In its decision, the Court quoted certain passages from the Qur'an in support of the position that a divorced man has an obligation to materially support his former wife. This decision triggered massive protests amongst conservative Indians Muslim, who viewed the decision as a deliberate attempt to undermine "their" personal laws and were outraged that a secular court tried to support its decision with references to the Qur'an. Fundamentalist Muslim leaders even pressured Shah Bano, to withdraw her support for the Court's decision in her favor. Despite acclaim for the decision from women rights advocates, including from some Muslim women groups, many Muslim leaders lobbied for legislation to overturn the Court's decision. As a result, without any consultation with either women's groups or moderate Muslim leaders, the national government hastily passed the Muslim Women Act of 1986, which limited a Muslim man's duty to pay maintenance to his former wife to her iddat period.” 2. Danial Latifi & Anr vs Union Of India on 28 September, 2001 	Muslim marriage is a contract and an element of consideration is necessary by way of mahr or dower and absence of consideration will discharge the marriage. On the other hand, Section 125CrPC has been enacted as a matter of public policy. 	. To enable a divorced wife, who is unable to maintain herself, to seek from her husband, who is having sufficient means and neglects or refuses to maintain her, payment of maintenance at a monthly rate not exceeding Rs.500/-. The expression wife includes a woman who has been divorced by, or has obtained a divorce from her husband and has not remarried. The religion professed by a spouse or the spouses has no relevance in the scheme of these provisions whether they are Hindus, Muslims, Christians or the Parsis, pagans or heathens. It is submitted that Section 125 CrPC is part of the Code of Criminal Procedure and not a civil law, which defines and governs rights and obligations of the parties belonging to a particular religion like the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, the Shariat, or the Parsi Matrimonial Act. Section 125CrPC, it is submitted, was enacted in order to provide a quick and summary remedy. The basis there being, neglect by a person of sufficient means to maintain these and the inability of these persons to maintain themselves, these provisions have been made and the moral edict of the law and morality cannot be clubbed with religion. 	. The argument is that the rationale of Section 125 CrPC is to off- set or to meet a situation where a divorced wife is likely to be led into destitution or vagrancy. Section 125 CrPC is enacted to prevent the same in furtherance of the concept of social justice embodied in Article 21of the Constitution. 	. It is, therefore, submitted that this Court will have to examine the questions raised before us not on the basis of Personal Law but on the basis that Section 125 CrPC is a provision made in respect of women belonging to all religions and exclusion of Muslim women from the same results in discrimination between women and women. Apart from the gender injustice caused in the country, this discrimination further leads to a monstrous proposition of nullifying a law declared by this Court in Shah Banos case. Thus there is a violation of not only equality before law but also equal protection of laws and inherent infringement of Article 21 as well as basic human values. If the object of Section 125 CrPC is to avoid vagrancy, the remedy thereunder cannot be denied to Muslim women. 	. The Act is an un-islamic, unconstitutional and it has the potential of suffocating the muslim women and it undermines the secular character, which is the basic feature of the Constitution; that there is no rhyme or reason to deprive the muslim women from the applicability of the provisions of Section 125 CrPC and consequently, the present Act must be held to be discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution; that excluding the application ofSection 125 CrPC is violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution; that the conferment of power on the Magistrate under sub-section (2) of Section 3 and Section 4 of the Act is different from the right of a muslim woman like any other woman in the country to avail of the remedies under Section 125 CrPC and such deprivement would make the Act unconstitutional, as there is no nexus to deprive a muslim woman from availing of the remedies available underSection 125 CrPC, notwithstanding the fact that the conditions precedent for availing of the said remedies are satisfied. The learned Solicitor General, who appeared for the Union of India, 	submitted that when a question of maintenance arises which forms part of 	the personal law of a community, what is fair and reasonable is a question 	of fact in that context. Under Section 3 of the Act, it is provided that a 	reasonable and fair provision and maintenance to be made and paid by her 	former husband within the iddat period would make it clear that it cannot 	be for life but would only be for a period of iddat and when that fact has 	clearly been stated in the provision, the question of interpretation as to 	whether it is for life or for the period of iddat would not arise. Challenge 	raised in this petition is dehors the personal law. Personal law is a 	legitimate basis for discrimination, if at all, and, therefore, does not 	offend Article 14 of the Constitution. If the legislature, as a matter of policy, 	wants to apply Section 125 CrPC to Muslims, it could also be stated that 	the same legislature can, by implication, withdraw such application and 	make some other provision in that regard. Parliament can amend Section 125 CrPC so as to exclude them and apply personal law and the policy of Section 125 CrPC is not to create a right of maintenance dehors the personal law. He further submitted that 	in Shah Banos case, it has been held that a divorced woman is entitled to maintenance even after the iddat period from the husband and that is how Parliament also understood the ratio of that decision. To overcome the ratio of the said decision, the present Act has been enacted and Section 3(1)(a) is not in 	discord with the personal law. 3. Shabana Bano vs Imran Khan on 4 December, 2009 At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant contended that learned Single Judge has gravely erred in dismissing the appellant's Revision on misconception of law on the ground that after divorce of a Muslim wife, a petition under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. would not be maintainable. It was also contended that learned Single Judge proceeded on wrong assumption in dismissing appellant's Revision claiming maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. It was also argued that both the courts below completely lost sight of the provisions of Section 7(1)(f) of the Crl.A. @ SLP(Crl.)NO.717/09 Family Courts Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Family Act'). . A comparison of these provisions with Section 125 CrPC will make it clear that requirements provided in Section 125 and the purpose, object and scope thereof being to prevent vagrancy by compelling those who can do so to support those who are unable to support themselves and who have a normal and legitimate claim to support are satisfied. If that is so, the argument of the petitioners that a different scheme being provided under the Act which is equally or more beneficial on the interpretation placed by us from the one provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure deprive them of their right, loses its significance. The object and scope of Section 125 CrPC is to prevent vagrancy by compelling those who are under an obligation to support those who are unable to support themselves and that object being fulfilled, we find it difficult to accept the contention urged on behalf of the petitioners.Crl.A. @ SLP(Crl.)NO.717/09 -	. Even under the Act, the parties agreed that the provisions of Section 125 CrPC would still be attracted and even otherwise, the Magistrate has been conferred with the power to make appropriate provision for maintenance and, therefore, what could be earlier granted by a Magistrate under Section 125 CrPC would now be granted under the very Act itself. This being the position, the Act cannot be held to be unconstitutional. . Judgment of this Court reported in (2007) 6 SCC 785 titled Iqbal Bano Vs. State of U.P.& Anr. whereby the provisions contained in Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. have been aptly considered and the relevant portion of the order passed in Iqbal Bano's case reads as under: . Proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. are civil in nature. Even if the Court noticed that there was a divorced woman in the case in question, it was open to it to treat it as a petition under the Act considering the beneficial nature of the legislation. Proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and claims made under the Act are tried by the same court. In Vijay Kumar Prasad Vs State of Bihar (2004) 5 SCC 196 it was held that proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. are civil in nature. It was noted as follows: (SCC p.200, Para 14).

4. Badshah vs Sou. Urmila Badshah Godse & Anr on 18 October, 2013 It is to be remembered that the order passed in an application under section 125 Cr.P.C. does not finally determine the rights and obligations of the parties and the said section is enacted with a view to provide summary remedy for providing maintenance to a wife, children and parents. For the purpose of getting his rights determined, the appellant has also filed Civil Suit which is spending before the trial court. In such a situation, this Court in S.Sethurathinam Pillai vs. Barbara alias Dolly Sethurathinam, (1971) 3 SCC 923, observed that maintenance under section 488,Cr.P.C. 1898 (similar to Section 125, Cr.P.C.) cannot be denied where there was some evidence on which conclusion for grant of maintenance could be reached. It was held that order passed under Section 488 is a summary order which does not finally determine the rights and obligations of the parties; the decision of the criminal Court that there was a valid marriage between the parties will not operate as decisive in any civil proceeding between the parties.” No doubt, it is not a case of second marriage but deals with standard of proof under Section125, Cr.P.C. by the applicant to prove her marriage with the respondent and was not a case of second marriage. However, at the same time, this reflects the approach which is to be adopted while considering the cases of maintenance under Section 125,Cr.P.C. which proceedings are in the nature of summary proceedings. Second case which we would like to refer is Chanmuniya vs. Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha & Anr.[4] The Court has held that the term “wife” occurring in Section 125, Cr.P.C. is to be given very wide interpretation. This is so stated in the following manner: 	Whether the living together of a man and woman as husband and wife for a considerable period of time would raise the presumption of a valid marriage between them and whether such a presumption would entitle the woman to maintenance underSection 125,Cr.P.C.? 	Whether strict proof of marriage is essential for a claim of maintenance underSection 125,Cr.P.C. having regard to the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005? 	Secondly, as already discussed above, when the marriage between respondent No.1 and petitioner was solemnized, the petitioner had kept the respondent No.1 in dark about her first marriage. A false representation was given to respondent No.1 that he was single and was competent to enter into martial tie with respondent No.1. In such circumstances, can the petitioner be allowed to take advantage of his own wrong and turn around to say that respondents are not entitled to maintenance by filing the petition under Section 125,Cr.P.C. as respondent No.1 is not “legally wedded wife” of the petitioner? Our answer is in the negative. We are of the view that at least for the purpose of Section 125 Cr.P.C., respondent No.1 would be treated as the wife of the petitioner, going by the spirit of the two judgments we have reproduced above. For this reason, we are of the opinion that the judgments of this Court in Adhav and Savitaben cases would apply only in those circumstances where a woman married a man with full knowledge of the first subsisting marriage. In such cases, she should know that second marriage with such a person is impermissible and there is an embargo under the Hindu Marriage Act and therefore she has to suffer the consequences thereof. The said judgment would not apply to those cases where a man marriages second time by keeping that lady in dark about the first surviving marriage. That is the only way two sets of judgments can be reconciled and harmonized.

5.	Captain Ramesh Chander v. Vijaya Kaushal AIR 1978 SC 1807 is the leading case u/s 24 of this Act.In this case the SC held that the direction by the Civil Court is not a final determination under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act but an order pendent lite u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act to pay expenses of the proceedings and monthly during proceeding such sum as having regard to the petitioners own income and the income of the respondent if the Court thinks it reasonable. 6.	Ira Das vrs. Rameh Ranjan Mallick, AIR2003 Orissa 62 In this case it was held that while determining the quantum of permanent alimony the income of the husband has to be kept in mind. 7.	In Rohin Kumari v. Narendra Singh AIR 1972SC 459 the Supreme Court held that if the husband calls upon his wife to return to him and if she does not reurn she still claim maintenance fro him u/s18(2)(d) of this Act. 8.	Smt.Jaitunbi Mubarak v. Mubarak Fakruddin Shaikh,1999 CrLJ 3846 In this case it was held that a divorced muslim woman who has not remarried and is unable to maintain herself after iddat period,either relatives of divorced wife or in absence or inability, State Waqf Board is liable to pay maintenance. 9.	Syed Iqbql Hussain v. Syed Nasemunnissa Begum 1991(3) Crimes 678 (AP) It was held that the minor children are entitled to maintenance till they attain majority or are married as the case may be or whichever is earlier. 10 Anirudha Mishra v. Dr. Sujata AIR 2004 Orissa 1:In this case it was held 	that where interim maintenance was ordered and later on it was found that 	wife was earning more than the husband, interim maintenance was 	cancelled on the ground that she was able to maintain herself. Conclusion After going through various sources of the personal laws, it's my conviction that the Hindu law is much more clearly defined and it gives much more rights and impotance to women in comparison to the Muslim law. Providing maintenance means that the other person who is getting the maintenance should be able to live the life as he or she used to live earlier, in case of divorce or in the case where the two partners are not living together and they seek maintenance. Maintenance is the amount by which a husband is under an obligation to make payment to a wife either during the subsistence of the marriage or upon separation or divorce, under certain circumstances. If we read the Shah Bano case we could see that the Muslim and the Hindu women were on the same side. But latter when the government passed The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 the Muslim women were again seen to be more unprivileged than the Hindu women. But later the court in the Daniel Latify judgment held that the Muslim women can also be awarded the same maintenance as the Hindu women for life time. Therefore according to my understanding I would say that both the Hindu and the Muslim women are in the same place in case of award of maintenance. Law of maintenance is personal as well as legal in character and arises from the very existence of relationship between the parties. From the above discussion, it can be concluded that Law of maintenance no doubt is inclined towards the females in both the structures whether it be Hindu Law or Muslim Law. Women have been bestowed with many more privileges in comparison to men and husbands have been granted a lot more of responsibilities and obligations in a patriarchal society. Although the given laws may sound unjust to a few but pragmatically they seem to be correct as in our country even till today women do not have the social status equal to that of men. Law makers while formulating these provisions must have kept in mind the situation of the women in the patriarchal society of India. The women of both the communities are still suffering due to economic dependence, silent acceptance, shyness and feminine weakness.