RUPSAN BEGUM Vs. MD ABDUS SATTAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revision petition the judgement and order dated 31-5-88 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nalbari in C.M. No. 7(N-1)88 and C.M. No. 9/88 are assailed.

(2.) By the judgement and order dated 31-5-88 passed in C.M. No. 9/88 the learned Sessions Judge set aside the order dated 10-2-88 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Nalbari and allowed the claim of the petitioner Smt. Rupsan Begum to her entitlement to get Rs. 2500/- from the opp. party, Abdus Sattar on account of Mahr (Dawer) money following her divorce by the opposite party in accordance with Mohamedan Law. The learned Sessions Judge however, rejected her claim on account of her maintenance as well as her properties holding that documentary evidences on records clearly established that petitioner was paid main tenance during the period of her Iddat and that she got back all her properties received by her before and after her marriage. On perusal of the impugned order and other materials on records, I do not find any legal infirmity in the impugned order passed in C. M. No. 9/88 which merits interference by this Court in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction.

(3.) By the impugned judgement and order dt. 31-5-88 passed in Crl. Motion No. 7(N-1) of 1988, the learned Sessions Judge held that the minor children of the petitioner, living with her are not entitled to maintenance by the opposite party under S.125, Cr. P.C. in view of the provisions of Sub-Section 1(b) of S.3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Divorce) Act, 1986 (The Act 25 of 1986), and set aside the judgement and order passed by the learned Magistrate awarding payment maintenance u/s. 125, Cr. P.C. at the rate of Rs. 100/- per month for each of her three children by the opposite party. By the impugned judgement and order the learned Sessions Judge however, ordered payment of maintenance at rate of Rs. 100/- per month by the opposite party for the youngest child of the petitioner up to the child's attaining 2 years of age. The impugned judgement and order dated 31-5-88 passed in Crl. Motion No. 7(N-1)88 therefore, involved the question, which needs to be decided, as to whether view of provisions of Sub-Section 1(b) of S.3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (Act 25 of 1986), minor children of muslim parents living with their mother after the divorce of the mother by the father is/are entitled to maintenance u/s.125, Cr. P.C. from the father when the mother is unable to maintain them. The object of the Act 25 of 1986, according to preamble, is to protect the rights of muslim women who have been divorced by or have obtained divorce from their husband and to provide for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Parliament with a view to striking a balance between the Muslim Personal Law and the interest of the muslim divorced women, enacted the Act 25 of 1986 which came into force on May, 1986. Section 3 of the Act 25 of 1986 provides as follows:-