RUKIYA Vs. MOHAMMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) First petitioner is the divorced Muslim woman, respondent is her former husband, the second petitioner is their son and he lives with the first petitioner. Petitioners filed application under S.125, Cr.P.C. in the Court of J.M.F.C., Puttur, District of Dakshina Kannada claiming maintenance. The learned Magistrate by the order impugned dated February 11, 1993 dismissed the application by the first petitioner for want of declaration in the prescribed form under S. 5 of the Act called "The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986". However allowed the application of the second petitioner granting Rs. 400/- a month for his maintenance. The learned counsel submits that he has challenged that portion of the order granting maintenance to the second petitioner in the Court of District and Sessions at Mangalore.

(2.) The relationship is not in dispute. It is also admitted that the respondent divorced the first petitioner on March 13, 1991 by sending the 'Talaknama' to her by Registered Post. The petitioners contended that the respondent having sufficient means neglected to maintain both of them. The respondent contended that after the coming into force of the Act, 1986 (25 of 1986), an application under S. 125, Cr.P.C. by the divorced woman is not maintainable.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for both the parties. In view of the rival contentions the short and interesting question that arises for consideration is whether an application under S. 125, Cr.P.C. by a divorced woman against her former husband would lie after the Act 1986 (25 of 1986) came into force. The Act came into force on May 19, 1986. Divorce in the case on hand is on March 13, 1991 and the application under S. 125, Cr.P.C. is filed on April 2, 1991.