SHAHJAHAN versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR. R1: THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH R2: SRI GAFFAR KHAN

SHAHJAHAN versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR. R1: THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH R2: SRI GAFFAR KHAN

The Family Court's reasons for denying maintenance to the appellant were ex facie unsustainable (including impermissible conjecture that no dowry demand in a second marriage and misreading of the compromise deed); under Section 125 CrPC maintenance should be granted to prevent destitution and, having regard to the facts, the Supreme Court directed respondent No.2 to pay Rs.4,000 per month to the appellant from the date of filing of the maintenance petition and that maintenance to the children be payable from that date (daughter's maintenance only up to her attaining majority); further, declarations/decisions of Dar-ul-Qaza/Court of Kazi/Sharia Courts have no legal recognition and are not...

Parties
Appellant: Shahjahan; Respondent No.1: The State of Uttar Pradesh; Respondent No.2: Sri Gaffar Khan
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court (final Disposal)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; Orders of the Family Court and High Court set aside
Legal Topics
Maintenance Under Section 125 Cr PC, Recognition of Dar Ul Qaza/sharia Courts/fatwas, Date From Which Maintenance Is Payable, Dowry Allegations, Compromise Settlements
Criminal Procedure Family Law Personal Law (muslim) Informal Justice Systems Maintenance Under Section 125 Cr PC Recognition of Dar Ul Qaza/sharia Courts/fatwas Date From Which Maintenance Is Payable Dowry Allegations +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shahjahan

Appellant

The State of Uttar Pradesh

Respondent No.1

Sri Gaffar Khan

Respondent No.2

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court (final Disposal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Family Court and High Court were correct in denying maintenance to the appellant-wife under Section 125 CrPC
  2. 2 From which date maintenance should be payable
  3. 3 Legal status and enforceability of decisions/declarations of Dar-ul-Qaza/Court of Kazi/Sharia courts

Ratio Decidendi

The Family Court's reasons for denying maintenance to the appellant were ex facie unsustainable (including impermissible conjecture that no dowry demand in a second marriage and misreading of the compromise deed); under Section 125 CrPC maintenance should be granted to prevent destitution and, having regard to the facts, the Supreme Court directed respondent No.2 to pay Rs.4,000 per month to the appellant from the date of filing of the maintenance petition and that maintenance to the children be payable from that date (daughter's maintenance only up to her attaining majority); further, declarations/decisions of Dar-ul-Qaza/Court of Kazi/Sharia Courts have no legal recognition and are not...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; Orders of the Family Court and High Court set aside

Orders

  • Order of the Family Court dated 23.04.2010 and Impugned Order of the High Court dated 03.08.2018 are set aside
  • Respondent No.2 to pay Rs.4,000 per month as maintenance to the appellant from the date of filing of the maintenance petition before the Family Court