Order For Maintenance Of Wives, Children And Parents MCQ Quiz - Objective Question with Answer for Order For Maintenance Of Wives, Children And Parents - Download Free PDF

The correct answer is 'Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum'

Key Points

• Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum Case:
  • This landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India in 1985 dealt with the issue of maintenance for divorced Muslim women under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
  • Shah Bano, a 62-year-old Muslim woman, filed a petition for maintenance from her husband, Mohd. Ahmed Khan, after being divorced.
  • The court ruled that a Muslim woman is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC even beyond the iddat period, which is the traditional post-divorce waiting period prescribed under Islamic law.
  • The judgment emphasized that the provision under Section 125 is applicable to all citizens irrespective of religion and was aimed at preventing destitution and ensuring justice for all women.
  • This decision sparked debates and led to the eventual enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, which modified the rights of Muslim women post-divorce.

Additional Information

• Incorrect Options:
  • Khatoon Begum v. Union of India: This case does not pertain to the issue of maintenance for Muslim women under Section 125 of the CrPC. It may involve other legal aspects unrelated to the topic.
  • Jamaat-e-Islami Hind v. Union of India: This case revolves around the banning of the Jamaat-e-Islami Hind and does not address issues related to maintenance for Muslim women.
  • Shayara Bano v. Union of India: This is a significant case involving the issue of triple talaq (instant divorce in Islam) and its constitutional validity. However, it does not deal with maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC.
• Impact of Shah Bano Judgment:
  • The Shah Bano case remains one of the most debated judgments in India's legal history, as it highlighted the conflict between personal laws and the secular provisions of the Indian Constitution.
  • It led to widespread discussions on women's rights, secularism, and the role of religion in lawmaking.
  • The judgment's aftermath saw the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 being enacted, which sought to address the concerns of the Muslim community while ensuring justice for divorced women.

The correct answer is 'Daughter-in-law.'

Key Points

• Maintenance under Section 125, Cr.P.C.:
  • Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) in India provides a legal framework for the maintenance of certain dependents. It aims to provide a quick remedy to those who are unable to maintain themselves.
  • The law applies to individuals who have sufficient means but refuse or neglect to maintain specific family members who are entitled to maintenance.
  • The primary objective is to prevent destitution and vagrancy by compelling those with the means to support their dependents.

Additional Information

• Persons entitled to maintenance:
  • The man's wife: A wife, unable to maintain herself, is entitled to maintenance from her husband under Section 125, Cr.P.C.
  • The man's illegitimate minor child: Both legitimate and illegitimate minor children, who are unable to maintain themselves, are entitled to maintenance from their father.
  • The man's father: An aged or infirm father who is unable to maintain himself can claim maintenance from his son.
• Persons not entitled to maintenance:
  • Daughter-in-law: Under Section 125, Cr.P.C., a daughter-in-law is not entitled to claim maintenance directly from her father-in-law. This section specifically lists the persons who can claim maintenance, and a daughter-in-law is not included in this list.

The correct answer is 'No limit'

Key Points

• Maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973:
  • Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973 empowers a Magistrate to order maintenance for wives, children, and parents who are unable to maintain themselves.
  • Initially, the maximum limit for maintenance was Rs. 500/-, but this limit was removed through amendments.
  • Currently, there is no upper limit on the amount of maintenance that a Magistrate can order.
  • The maintenance amount depends on the financial capacity of the person liable to pay maintenance and the needs of the claimant.
  • The 2019 amendment to CrPC made it clear that the amount should be just, fair, and adequate for the dependent's standard of living.

Additional Information

• Rs. 500/-:
  • This was the maximum amount under Section 125 CrPC before the 2001 amendment.
  • However, this limit was later removed, making this option incorrect.
• Rs. 5000/-:
  • Some state legislations had imposed a Rs. 5000/- limit earlier, but this limit was also removed.
  • The Magistrate now has discretion to grant any reasonable amount based on the case facts.
• Rs. 10,000/-:
  • There is no fixed upper limit under Section 125 CrPC.
  • The amount granted depends on the husband's financial status and the standard of living of the dependent.

The correct answer is All of these

Key Points

• Section 125 CrPC provides a statutory remedy for dependents (wife, children, parents) to claim maintenance.
• It is a personal right, not a proprietary or civil right.
• The order of maintenance does not create any charge on the property of the person directed to pay.
• Maintenance cannot be enforced against alienable property, as it is not a secured debt.
• The liability is personal and enforceable like a fine through the criminal procedure.

NA 

Key PointsSection 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with Order for maintenance of wives, children and parents.

The correct option is Option 4.

Key Points

• Alteration in Allowance:-
  • Section 127 CrPC provides for ‘Alteration in Allowance’.
  • Alteration means a change in the monthly allowance, that is it may decrease or increase according to the change in the conditions of the parties.
  • According to Section 127(1):
    • If a magistrate orders to give allowance for maintenance under Section 125 according to the conditions of parties at that time but if the present conditions of parties have changed, then he can also order to alter the allowance.
  • According to Section 127(2):
    • The Magistrate shall cancel or revoke any order given under Section 125 by him, if it appears that it should be cancelled in consequence of any decision of the competent Civil Court.
  • According to Section 127(3):
    • Where an order has been made in favour of women under Section 125, then the magistrate can cancel the order in the following case:
      • If a woman is remarried after divorce.
      • If a woman has taken allowance under any personal laws after divorce.
      • If a woman has voluntary leave her right to maintenance.
  • According to Section 127(4):
    • The Civil Court shall take into account the sum which has been paid to such person as monthly allowance for maintenance and interim maintenance under Section 125 at the time of making any decree for the recovery of any maintenance or dowry.

Additional Information

• Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1973 (CrPC) provides that any person who has sufficient means to maintain himself cannot deny to maintain his wife, children and parents if they are not able to maintain themselves.

The correct answer is 'Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum'

Key Points

• Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum Case:
  • This landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India in 1985 dealt with the issue of maintenance for divorced Muslim women under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
  • Shah Bano, a 62-year-old Muslim woman, filed a petition for maintenance from her husband, Mohd. Ahmed Khan, after being divorced.
  • The court ruled that a Muslim woman is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC even beyond the iddat period, which is the traditional post-divorce waiting period prescribed under Islamic law.
  • The judgment emphasized that the provision under Section 125 is applicable to all citizens irrespective of religion and was aimed at preventing destitution and ensuring justice for all women.
  • This decision sparked debates and led to the eventual enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, which modified the rights of Muslim women post-divorce.

Additional Information

• Incorrect Options:
  • Khatoon Begum v. Union of India: This case does not pertain to the issue of maintenance for Muslim women under Section 125 of the CrPC. It may involve other legal aspects unrelated to the topic.
  • Jamaat-e-Islami Hind v. Union of India: This case revolves around the banning of the Jamaat-e-Islami Hind and does not address issues related to maintenance for Muslim women.
  • Shayara Bano v. Union of India: This is a significant case involving the issue of triple talaq (instant divorce in Islam) and its constitutional validity. However, it does not deal with maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC.
• Impact of Shah Bano Judgment:
  • The Shah Bano case remains one of the most debated judgments in India's legal history, as it highlighted the conflict between personal laws and the secular provisions of the Indian Constitution.
  • It led to widespread discussions on women's rights, secularism, and the role of religion in lawmaking.
  • The judgment's aftermath saw the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 being enacted, which sought to address the concerns of the Muslim community while ensuring justice for divorced women.

The correct answer is option 3.Key Points

• Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) is a legal provision in India that deals with the maintenance of wives, children, and parents.
• It is aimed at providing financial support to individuals who are unable to maintain themselves.
• It says If any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain:
  • His wife, unable to maintain herself, or
  • His legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself, or
  • 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
  • His father or mother, unable to maintain himself or herself,
• a Magistrate of the first class may, upon proof of such neglect 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 as such Magistrate thinks fit and to pay the same to such person as the Magistrate may from time to time direct.

The correct answer is concubine.

Key Points

• Section 125 of the CrPC provides for the Order for maintenance of wives, children and parents.
• It states that —(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,
  a Magistrate of the first class may, upon proof of such neglect 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 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:
  Provided further that the Magistrate may, during the pendency of the proceeding regarding monthly allowance for the maintenance under this sub-section, order such person to make a monthly allowance for the interim maintenance of his wife or such child, father or mother, and the expenses of such proceeding which the Magistrate considers reasonable, and to pay the same to such person as the Magistrate may from time to time direct:
  Provided also that an application for the monthly allowance for the interim maintenance and expenses of proceeding under the second proviso shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within sixty days from the date of the service of notice of the application to such person. 
  Explanation.—For the purposes of this Chapter,—
  (a) “minor” means a person who, under the provisions of the Indian Majority Act, 1875 (9 of 1875) is deemed not to have attained his majority;
  (b) “wife” includes a woman who has been divorced by, or has obtained a divorce from, her husband and has not remarried.
  (2) Any such allowance for the maintenance or interim maintenance and expenses of proceeding shall be payable from the date of the order, or, if so ordered, from the date of the application for maintenance or interim maintenance and expenses of proceeding, as the case may be.
  (3) If any person so ordered fails without sufficient cause to comply with the order, any such Magistrate may, for every breach of the order, issue a warrant for levying the amount due in the manner provided for levying fines, and may sentence such person, for the whole or any part of each month’s 2 [allowance for the maintenance or the interim maintenance and expenses of proceeding, as the case may be, remaining unpaid after the execution of the warrant, to imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or until payment if sooner made:
  Provided that no warrant shall be issued for the recovery of any amount due under this section unless application be made to the Court to levy such amount within a period of one year from the date on which it became due:
  Provided further that if such person offers to maintain his wife on condition of her living with him, and she refuses to live with him, such Magistrate may consider any grounds of refusal stated by her, and may make an order under this section notwithstanding such offer, if he is satisfied that there is just ground for so doing.
  Explanation.—If a husband has contracted marriage with another woman or keeps a mistress, it shall be considered to be just ground for his wife’s refusal to live with him.
  (4) No wife shall be entitled to receive an allowance for the maintenance or the interim maintenance and expenses of proceeding, as the case may be, from her husband under this section if she is living in adultery, or if, without any sufficient reason, she refuses to live with her husband, or if they are living separately by mutual consent.
  (5) On proof that any wife in whose favour an order has been made under this section in living in adultery, or that without sufficient reason she refuses to live with her husband, or that they are living separately by mutual consent.

The correct option is All of the above.

Key Points

• Features of section 125 of CrPC:- 
  • Sufficient means to maintain:-
    • It is the most fundamental condition that an order of maintenance against a person can be passed only if he or she has "sufficient means to maintain" the person who has the claim and neglects or refuses to do so.
    • The Delhi High Court stated that it means as long as a man is healthy and he is held as being possessive of the means to support his family he cannot be relieved of such obligation simply because he is unemployed, in debt or insolvent.
    • The burden of proof is on the person claiming that he has no sufficient means to maintain.
    • The obligation is not removed simply because he is unemployed.
    • Case:- Hardev Singh V. State
      • The court stated that if a person cannot pay such maintenance allowance because he is a monk then he must throw off the yellow robe and work.
  • Neglect and Refusal to maintain:-
    • The word ''Neglect' is used to mean a failure to maintain even when no such demand is made against the maintainer.
    • Neglect means a disregard of duty which could be either willful or intentional.
    • The 'refusal to maintain' is when there is a clear intentioned refusal to perform his duty this refusal may be expressed or even implied by the conduct of the husband.
    • The burden of proof for this lies with the claimant.
    • It is at the offset essential that the wife is living with the husband for her to claim maintenance but such a condition can be removed from her claim if the magistrate finds that she has a justified reason for doing so.
    • Example:- If the husband has taken in a new wife and if it is ritually permitted by their law, the claimant wife may refuse to live with the husband and still be able to claim maintenance.
  • The claimant must be unable to maintain himself or herself:- 
    • It is one of the essentials for a wife to claim maintenance is her inability to maintain herself.
    • She does not have to specifically plead that she is unable to maintain herself.
    • Case:- Karnataka High Court case
      • The court held that if the wife is healthy and of quality education and still unable to maintain herself then she can still claim maintenance but these facts will affect the amount awarded to her.
  • Quantum of maintenance:-
    • The magistrate was required to award maintenance not exceeding Rs. 500 till the Amendment Act No. 50 of 2001.
    • No there is no limit set for a maximum amount and it is left up to the Magistrate to fix a monthly rate as he or she may deem fit for the case.
    • The rate has to be fixed and determinate and not progressively increasing however, it can be altered from time to time according to Section 127.
• If the wife and child are both claimants against the same person then it is not within the section to award them a joint payment each one has a separate claim which may be awarded.

The correct option is Option 3.

Key Points

• Features of section 125 of CrPC:- 
  • Sufficient means to maintain:-
    • It is the most fundamental condition that an order of maintenance against a person can be passed only if he or she has "sufficient means to maintain" the person who has the claim and neglects or refuses to do so.
    • The Delhi High Court stated that it means as long as a man is healthy and he is held as being possessive of the means to support his family he cannot be relieved of such obligation simply because he is unemployed, in debt or insolvent.
    • The burden of proof is on the person claiming that he has no sufficient means to maintain.
    • The obligation is not removed simply because he is unemployed.
    • Case:- Hardev Singh V. State
      • The court stated that if a person cannot pay such maintenance allowance because he is a monk then he must throw off the yellow robe and work.
  • Neglect and Refusal to maintain:-
    • The word ''Neglect' is used to mean a failure to maintain even when no such demand is made against the maintainer.
    • Neglect means a disregard of duty which could be either willful or intentional.
    • The 'refusal to maintain' is when there is a clear intentioned refusal to perform his duty this refusal may be expressed or even implied by the conduct of the husband.
    • The burden of proof for this lies with the claimant.
    • It is at the offset essential that the wife is living with the husband for her to claim maintenance but such a condition can be removed from her claim if the magistrate finds that she has a justified reason for doing so.
    • Example:- If the husband has taken in a new wife and if it is ritually permitted by their law, the claimant wife may refuse to live with the husband and still be able to claim maintenance.
  • The claimant must be unable to maintain himself or herself:- 
    • It is one of the essentials for a wife to claim maintenance is her inability to maintain herself.
    • She does not have to specifically plead that she is unable to maintain herself.
    • Case:- Karnataka High Court case
      • The court held that if the wife is healthy and of quality education and still unable to maintain herself then she can still claim maintenance but these facts will affect the amount awarded to her.
  • Quantum of maintenance:-
    • The magistrate was required to award maintenance not exceeding Rs. 500 till the Amendment Act No. 50 of 2001.
    • No there is no limit set for a maximum amount and it is left up to the Magistrate to fix a monthly rate as he or she may deem fit for the case.
    • The rate has to be fixed and determinate and not progressively increasing however, it can be altered from time to time according to Section 127.

The correct option is Option 4.

Key Points

• Alteration in Allowance:-
  • Section 127 CrPC provides for ‘Alteration in Allowance’.
  • Alteration means a change in the monthly allowance, that is it may decrease or increase according to the change in the conditions of the parties.
  • According to Section 127(1):
    • If a magistrate orders to give allowance for maintenance under Section 125 according to the conditions of parties at that time but if the present conditions of parties have changed, then he can also order to alter the allowance.
  • According to Section 127(2):
    • The Magistrate shall cancel or revoke any order given under Section 125 by him, if it appears that it should be cancelled in consequence of any decision of the competent Civil Court.
  • According to Section 127(3):
    • Where an order has been made in favour of women under Section 125, then the magistrate can cancel the order in the following case:
      • If a woman is remarried after divorce.
      • If a woman has taken allowance under any personal laws after divorce.
      • If a woman has voluntary leave her right to maintenance.
  • According to Section 127(4):
    • The Civil Court shall take into account the sum which has been paid to such person as monthly allowance for maintenance and interim maintenance under Section 125 at the time of making any decree for the recovery of any maintenance or dowry.

Additional Information

• Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1973 (CrPC) provides that any person who has sufficient means to maintain himself cannot deny to maintain his wife, children and parents if they are not able to maintain themselves.

The correct answer is Option 2

Key PointsIn  Dr. (Mrs.) Vijaya Manohar Arbat vs Kashi Rao Rajaram Sawai And Anr on 18 February, 1987 the Supreme Court has held that a married daughter with independent sufficient means of her own is liable to maintain her father or mother under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 

The correct answer is the Maintenance of divorced Muslim women.

Key Points

• The Shah Bano case, formally known as Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985), was a landmark judgment in India related to maintenance rights of Muslim women.
• Shah Bano Begum, a 62-year-old Muslim woman, was divorced by her husband, Mohammed Ahmed Khan, in 1978. After the divorce, she filed a petition in court demanding maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which applies to all citizens irrespective of their religion.
• In 1985, the Supreme Court of India ruled in favor of Shah Bano, granting her the maintenance. The court upheld that she was entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC, which overrides personal laws. 

The correct answer is Option 1.

Key Points

• Shayara Bano v. Union of India, a 35-year-old woman, challenged the practice after getting divorced under the triple talaq custom. In 2017, the Supreme Court, in a landmark 3-2 verdict, had struck down instant triple talaq. Three of the five judges on the Constitution Bench had called the practise un-Islamic and “arbitrary” and disagreed with the view that triple talaq was an integral part of religious practice. 
• The ruling of SC is truly a watershed moment in women empowerment movement in India. The court has given progressive thoughts enshrined in the Constitution precedence over personal law in society.