Divorced Muslim Woman Alimony

Divorced Muslim Woman Entitled To Alimony For Life: HC

In a landmark ruling, the Allahabad High Court on Wednesday said a Muslim woman has the right to receive maintenance from her divorced husband not just till the completion of the ‘Iddat’ period, but for the rest of her life.

The alimony should be such that she can live the same life as she had been living before the divorce, the court ruled.

‘Iddat’ is a custom that bars Muslim women from stepping out and meeting relatives for four months following the death of their husbands.

The court set aside the order of the Principal Judge Family Court, Ghazipur, granting alimony only till the ‘Iddat’ period, terming it illegal. It said the Ghazipur court had given the order without properly perusing the statutory provisions and evidence.

“Under Section 3(3) of the Muslim Act, 1986, an order can be passed directing the former husband of the divorcee to pay to her such reasonable and fair provision and maintenance as deemed fit and proper having regard to needs of the divorced woman, her standard of life enjoyed by her during her marriage and means of her former husband,” the court observed.

“The word “provision” used in Section 3 of the Muslim Act, 1986 indicates that something is provided in advance for meeting some needs,” the court said.

“In other words, at the time of divorce the Muslim husband is required to contemplate the future needs and make preparatory arrangements in advance for meeting those needs,” the court said.

“Reasonable and fair provision” may include provision for her residence, her food, her cloths, and other articles,” the court said.

“In the case of Danial Latifi and another (supra), in Para-28, Hon’ble Supreme Court has fairly interpreted the provisions of Section 3 with regard to fair provision and maintenance and held that “it would extend to the whole life of the divorced wife unless she gets married for a second time,” the court observed.

The court observed that Section 4 deals with the Order for payment of maintenance, — Notwithstanding anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this Act or in any other law for the time being in force, where a Magistrate is satisfied that a divorced woman has not re-married and is not able to maintain herself after the iddat period, he may make an order directing such of her relatives as would be entitled to inherit her property on her death according to Muslim law to pay such reasonable and fair maintenance to her as he may determine fit and proper, having regard to the needs of the divorced woman, the standard of life enjoyed by her during her marriage and the means of such relatives and such maintenance shall be payable by such relatives in the proportions in which they would inherit the property and at such periods.”

The HC said under Section 3(2) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, a divorced woman can file an application for maintenance from her ex-husband before a magistrate.

The court ordered the magistrate concerned to pass an order in three months on alimony, and it then, it ruled that the ex-husband will pay an interim alimony of Rs 5,000 per month to his divorced wife.

The judgment, in favour of the plea by Zahid Khatoon, was delivered by a division bench of Justice SP Kesarwani and Justice MAH Idrisi.

The HC made it clear that a Muslim woman was entitled to maintenance from her ex-husband even after the customary ‘Iddat’ period.

If she is not being given maintenance, she has the right to approach the magistrate, the court said in its judgment.

Zahid Khatoon wed Noorul Haq Khan on May 21, 1989. After their nikah (marriage), the husband got a job in a post office.

However, he divorced his wife on June 28, 2000, and got married a second time two years later.

His ex-wife filed an application under Section 3 of the Muslim Women Protection Act before the Judicial Magistrate, Junior Division, Ghazipur. The case was transferred by the district judge to the Family Court.

She also filed an application under Section 125 of CrPC. During the hearing for the same, the magistrate ordered the ex-husband to pay her Rs 1,500 per month till the period before the divorce.

The revision petition filed, challenging the order, was dismissed and there was no petition filed against the same.

The family court, after examining the evidence and testimony, ordered the ex-husband to pay Rs 1,500 monthly for a period of three months and 13 days. (ANI)

Read More: https://lokmarg.com

Gyanvapi carbon dating

Gyanpavi: HC Seeks ASI Affidavit On Conducting Carbon Dating Of Shivling

Allahabad High Court on Monday asked the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) to file an affidavit on whether the ‘carbon dating of the purported ‘Shivling’ found inside the premises of the Gyanvapi Mosque, can be conducted without defacing its shape.

The High Court directed the ASI to file its affidavit on the next date of hearing — November 30.
The HC was hearing a review petition filed by Lakshmi Devi and three others, challenging the Varanasi district court’s order of a ‘scientific survey’ of the purported Shivling, which is claimed to be a part of the fountain of the wazu khana by the mosque management.

In its order on Monday, the single bench of Justice JJ Muneer asked the ASI to confirm if ‘carbon dating’, a method to determine an object’s age, can be conducted without defacing the purported Shivling.

“The subordinate court has rejected the application for conducting a scientific survey in view of the status quo order issued by the Supreme Court. Apprehension has been expressed that carbon dating may damage the alleged Shivling,” the bench stated, adding that it was necessary to determine the age of the ‘Shivling’ without deforming its shape.

The counsel for the petitioners, Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, said only a scientific survey (carbon dating) can bring forth correct information on the ‘Shivling’ found in the Gyanvapi mosque complex, along with other religious items.

It will also establish beyond any reasonable doubt how old the ‘Shivling’ and other idols found there are, the counsel for the petition further submitted.

Earlier, the petitioners had filed an application in the district court, Varanasi seeking a scientific survey of the Gyanvapi Masjid complex.

The court, however, rejected the plea on October 14 saying that doing so could damage the structure.

The single-bench of the Allahabad HC on Monday also directed the principal secretary of the Department of Religious Affairs, Uttar Pradesh, to file an affidavit on the government’s position or stand in the matter on the next date of hearing — November 30.

The chief standing counsel of the state government, Pancham Bipin Bihari Pandey, was directed to clarify the government’s stand by filing an affidavit on behalf of the principal secretary, Department of Religious Affairs, UP.

Advocate Manoj Singh, appearing for the Union government, had sought three months’ time to clarify its position on the matter. However, the court directed that an affidavit is to be filed by November 30. (ANI)

Read More: https://lokmarg.com/

Azam Khan Disqualified From UP Assembly Membership

SP leader and Rampur MLA Azam Khan were on Friday disqualified from the membership of the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly, as per the Office of UP Assembly Speaker, a day after he was sentenced to 3 years in prison along with a fine of Rs 2,000 in a hate speech case of 2019.

Khan has been sentenced to three years in prison in a 2019 hate speech case by the Rampur District court, and he lost his Assembly membership as his eventual imprisonment term is longer than two years.
The SP leader lost his MLA post because as per the 2013 Supreme Court judgment if an MLA, MLC, or MP is convicted in a criminal case and gets jailed for a minimum of two years then he/she loses membership of the house with immediately effect.

Azam Khan won the 2019 Lok Sabha election from Rampur (UP) but he vacated this seat after being elected to the UP state assembly in March 2022. The SP leader had won the 2022 assembly election from Rampur while being lodged in Sitapur jail.

Earlier on Thursday, the Samajwadi Party leader and two other accused were sentenced to three years in prison along with a fine of Rs 2,000 in a hate speech case filed against him over his speech against UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath. However, he has been granted bail and given a week’s time to appeal against the sentence.

A case was registered against Khan in Rampur in April 2019 for allegedly making provocative remarks against the Uttar Pradesh CM and the then District Magistrate of Rampur, Aunjaneya Kumar Singh.

During the 2019 Lok Sabha election campaign, Khan had used provocative remarks against the then Rampur district magistrate Aunjaneya Kumar Singh, chief minister Yogi Adityanath, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and Congress candidate Sanjay Kapoor.

Earlier this year, Azam Khan was released from Sitapur district jail, a day after the Supreme Court granted him interim bail in an alleged case of cheating.

The SP leader was also granted bail in a cheating case lodged at the police station in Rampur.

Khan has been lodged in Sitapur jail since February 2020 as many cases are registered against him.

Earlier, in a big relief to the SP leader, the Allahabad High Court on October 1, 2022, had put his arrest on hold. The matter pertains to the disappearance of machines used for construction in 2017 for which a case was registered on September 19, this year.

A person named Baqur Khan brought the case to the fore. The missing machinery including bulldozers, carriers, and other materials was later found on the premises of Muhammad Ali Jauhar University. The Allahabad HC also sought a reply from the Uttar Pradesh government on this matter.

On May 10, 2022, the Allahabad HC granted interim bail to Khan in a case related to wrongful possession of Waqf Board property.

Azam Khan began his political career by winning the 1980 assembly election on Janata Party (Secular) ticket from Rampur. He has served as a minister in both Akhilesh Yadav and Mulayam Singh Yadav governments. (ANI)

Read More:https://lokmarg.com/

Shivling gyanvapi case

Allahabad HC To Hear Gyanvapi Case Today

Allahabad High Court on Wednesday will hear a plea on Wednesday challenging the Varanasi District Court’s decision on the challenge to the petition of Hindu devotees.

The matter is related to the Kashi Vishwanath temple-Gyanvapi mosque dispute. The Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee has filed a petition in the Allahabad High Court against the order passed by the Varanasi District Court.

The plea stated that the order passed in the district court is not maintainable. The plea claimed the Gyanvapi case falls under the Worship Act, under which it cannot be heard.

The High Court on Tuesday imposed a fine of Rs 10,000 on the Director General of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) for failing to submit a personal affidavit within the deadline. The HC granted the last opportunity to the SSI DG to file a personal affidavit in the case in 10 days.

The High Court was hearing a case in which a Varanasi court ordered the ASI to conduct a survey in the Kashi Vishwanath temple-Gyanvapi mosque complex to ascertain whether a Hindu temple was partially demolished for the construction of the Gyanvapi mosque in the 17th century.

The plea was filed by the Anjuman Intazamia Masjid Committee challenging the suit filed in Varanasi court and seeking the restoration of land on which the Gyanvapi mosque is situated.

Pertinent to mention, a Varanasi court on Friday rejected the plea seeking carbon dating and scientific investigation of the purported ‘Shivling’ claimed to be found in the Gyanvapi mosque complex.

The Hindu side had claimed that a ‘Shivling’ was found in the premises near the ‘wazukhana’ during the videography survey of the mosque premises, which was ordered by the court.

However, the Muslim side said that the structure found was a ‘fountain’. The Hindu side had then submitted an application on September 22 that sought a carbon dating of the object they claimed to be ‘Shivling’.

Carbon dating is a scientific process that ascertains the age of an archaeological object or archaeological finds. Earlier, an appeal had been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the order of the Allahabad High Court which had dismissed a PIL that sought the appointment of a committee/commission under a judge to study the nature of the structure found in the Gyanvapi Mosque, Varanasi.

The appeal filed by seven devotees sought direction from the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) to ascertain the nature of the structure found on the Gyanvapi campus.

The Allahabad High Court had on July 19 dismissed their plea seeking the appointment of a committee/commission headed by a judge of the High Court or supreme court (sitting/retired) to study the nature of the structure found in the Gyanvapi Mosque.

The PIL moved before the High Court seeks direction from a committee to ascertain whether a Shivaling, as claimed by the Hindus, had been found inside the mosque or if it is a fountain as claimed by Muslims.

The appeal in the top court stated that the Allahabad High Court had erred in dismissing the plea.

On May 20, the Supreme Court ordered the transfer of the case related to worship at Gyanvapi mosque from the civil judge to the District Judge, Varanasi. (ANI)

Read More:https://lokmarg.com/

Gyanvapi: Court Rejects Plea Seeking Carbon Dating Of Shivling

A Varanasi court on Friday rejected the plea seeking carbon dating and scientific investigation of the purported ‘Shivling’ claimed to be found in the Gyanvapi mosque complex.

The Hindu side had claimed that a ‘Shivling’ was found in the premises near the ‘wazukhana’ during the videography survey of the mosque premises, which was ordered by the court.
However, the Muslim side said that the structure found was a ‘fountain’. The Hindu side had then submitted an application on September 22 that sought a carbon dating of the object they claimed to be ‘Shivling’.

Carbon dating is a scientific process that ascertains the age of an archaeological object or archaeological finds.

Speaking to ANI, Vishnu Jain, representing the Hindu side said, “The Muslim side said that Shivling is not a part of the suit property and its carbon dating cannot be done. We have given our clarification on both of these points. The court will deliver its verdict on October 14.”

Earlier on September 29, the Hindu side demanded a scientific investigation of the ‘Shivling’ by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the carbon dating of ‘Argha’ and the area around it.

The court had reserved the order in the Gyanvapi Mosque-Shringar Gauri case after hearing both sides’ arguments.

Akhlaq Ahmed, representing the Muslim side had said that the plea by the Hindu side is not maintainable as it is against the order of the Supreme Court that stated protecting the structure (which the Muslim side claims to be a fountain and the Hindu side claims to be a Shivling).

“We responded to the application on carbon dating. Stone does not have the capacity to absorb carbon. The Supreme Court in its May 17 order, according to which, the object that was found by the commission, had to be protected. The order of the SC will prevail, so the object cannot be opened. According to the Hindu side, the process will be scientific, even if it is so, there will be tampering with the object. Chemicals will be used for the test. We will take action based on the order by the court on October 14,” Ahmed told ANI.

Another lawyer representing the Muslim side, Tohid Khan said, “The court will deliver its verdict on whether the application seeking carbon dating is acceptable or should be rejected. The structure is a fountain and not Shivling. The fountain can still be made operational.”

Earlier, an appeal had been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the order of the Allahabad High Court which had dismissed a PIL that sought the appointment of a committee/commission under a judge to study the nature of the structure found in the Gyanvapi Mosque, Varanasi.

The appeal filed by seven devotees sought direction from the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) to ascertain the nature of the structure found on the Gyanvapi campus.

The Allahabad High Court had on July 19 dismissed their plea seeking the appointment of a committee/commission headed by a judge of the High Court or supreme court (sitting/retired) to study the nature of the structure found in the Gyanvapi Mosque.

The PIL moved before the High Court seeks direction from a committee to ascertain whether a Shivaling, as claimed by the Hindus, had been found inside the mosque or if it is a fountain as claimed by Muslims.

The appeal in the top court stated that the Allahabad High Court had erred in dismissing the plea.

On May 20, the Supreme Court ordered the transfer of the case related to worship at Gyanvapi mosque from the civil judge to the District Judge, Varanasi. (ANI)

Read More:https://lokmarg.com/

Shivling In Gyanvapi

Varanasi Court To Decide On Shivling In Gyanvapi Today

A Varanasi court is expected to deliver its verdict on Friday on the Hindu side’s plea seeking carbon dating of the purported ‘Shivling’ claimed to be found in the Gyanvapi mosque complex.

The Hindu side had claimed that a ‘Shivling’ was found in the premises near the ‘wazukhana’ during the videography survey of the mosque premises, which was ordered by the court. However, the Muslim side said that the structure found was a ‘fountain’. The Hindu side had then submitted an application on September 22 that sought a carbon dating of the object they claimed to be ‘Shivling’.
Carbon dating is a scientific process that ascertains the age of an archaeological object or archaeological finds.

Speaking to ANI, Vishnu Jain, representing the Hindu side said, “The Muslim side said that Shivling is not a part of the suit property and its carbon dating cannot be done. We have given our clarification on both of these points. The court will deliver its verdict on October 14.”

Earlier on September 29, the Hindu side demanded a scientific investigation of the ‘Shivling’ by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the carbon dating of ‘Argha’ and the area around it.

The court had reserved the order in the Gyanvapi Mosque-Shringar Gauri case after hearing both sides’ arguments.

Akhlaq Ahmed, representing the Muslim side had said that the plea by the Hindu side is not maintainable as it is against the order of the Supreme Court that stated protecting the structure (which the Muslim side claims to be a fountain and the Hindu side claims to be a Shivling).

“We responded to the application on carbon dating. Stone does not have the capacity to absorb carbon. The Supreme Court in its May 17 order, according to which, the object that was found by the commission, had to be protected. The order of the SC will prevail, so the object cannot be opened. According to the Hindu side, the process will be scientific, even if it is so, there will be tampering with the object. Chemicals will be used for the test. We will take action based on the order by the court on October 14,” Ahmed told ANI.

Another lawyer representing the Muslim side, Tohid Khan said, “The court will deliver its verdict on whether the application seeking carbon dating is acceptable or should be rejected. The structure is a fountain and not Shivling. The fountain can still be made operational.”

Earlier, an appeal had been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the order of the Allahabad High Court which had dismissed a PIL that sought the appointment of a committee/commission under a judge to study the nature of the structure found in the Gyanvapi Mosque, Varanasi.

The appeal filed by seven devotees sought direction from the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) to ascertain the nature of the structure found on the Gyanvapi campus.

The Allahabad High Court had on July 19 dismissed their plea seeking the appointment of a committee/commission headed by a judge of the High Court or supreme court (sitting/retired) to study the nature of the structure found in the Gyanvapi Mosque.

The PIL moved before the High Court seeks direction from a committee to ascertain whether a Shivaling, as claimed by the Hindus, had been found inside the mosque or if it is a fountain as claimed by Muslims.

The appeal in the top court stated that the Allahabad High Court had erred in dismissing the plea.

On May 20, the Supreme Court ordered the transfer of the case related to worship at Gyanvapi mosque from the civil judge to the District Judge, Varanasi. (ANI)

Read More:https://lokmarg.com/

Gyanvapi carbon dating

Gyanvapi Case: Verdict On Shivling Carbon Dating Defers Till Oct 11

The Varanasi court on Friday deferred to October 11 the hearing on the Hindu side’s plea seeking carbon dating/scientific investigation of the structure found inside the Gyanvapi Mosque which they claimed to be a ‘Shivling’.

The Anjuman Intezamia Committee’s arguments will be heard by the Varanasi court on October 11 and thereafter, the court will pronounce its order on the matter.
Speaking to media persons, Advocate Vishnu Jain, representing the Hindu side in the Gyanvapi case said, “The court asked us to clarify on two points whether the structure found inside Gyanvapi Masjid is part of this suit property or not? Second, can the court issue a commission for scientific inquiry? We have submitted our reply.”

Advocate Jain further said that the Muslim side has sought some time to reply. The matter will now be heard on October 11.

The bench of Varanasi District Judge Ajay Krishna Vishwesh delivered the order.

“We said that it is part of our suit property and by virtue of Order 26 Rule 10A of CPC, the Court has the power to direct scientific investigation. Muslim side has sought some time to reply. The matter will now be heard on October 11,” he added.

Earlier on September 29, the court had reserved the order in the Gyanvapi Mosque-Shringar Gauri case after hearing both sides’ arguments.

The Hindu side had claimed that a ‘Shivling’ was found in the premises near the ‘wazukhana’ during the videography survey of the mosque premises, which was ordered by the court. However, the Muslim side said that the structure found was a ‘fountain’. The Hindu side had then submitted an application on September 22 that sought a carbon dating of the object they claimed to be ‘Shivling’.

Carbon dating is a scientific process that ascertains the age of an archaeological object or archaeological finds.

Besides this case, two more cases that could not be heard on Thursday due to the holiday will be heard today. First, pertaining to the demand from the court to worship the Shivling found in Gyanvapi, a case filed on behalf of Shankaracharya Swami Avimukteshwarananda.

The second is in connection with the case demanding to hand over the ‘Shivling’ site found in Gyanvapi to the Hindus. Hearing on both applications is to be held in the court of Senior Civil Judge Kumudlata Tripathi today.

Earlier on September 29, the Hindu side demanded a scientific investigation of the ‘Shivling’ by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the carbon dating of ‘Argha’ and the area around it.

Earlier, an appeal had been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the order of the Allahabad High Court which had dismissed a PIL that sought the appointment of a committee/commission under a judge to study the nature of the structure found in the Gyanvapi Mosque, Varanasi.

The appeal filed by seven devotees sought direction from the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) to ascertain the nature of the structure found on the Gyanvapi campus.

The Allahabad High Court had on July 19 dismissed their plea seeking the appointment of a committee/commission headed by a judge of the High Court or supreme court (sitting/retired) to study the nature of the structure found in the Gyanvapi Mosque.

The PIL moved before the High Court seeks direction from a committee to ascertain whether a Shivalinga, as claimed by the Hindus, had been found inside the mosque or if it is a fountain as claimed by Muslims.

The appeal in the top court stated that the Allahabad High Court had erred in dismissing the plea.

On May 20, the Supreme Court ordered the transfer of the case related to worship at Gyanvapi mosque from the civil judge to the District Judge, Varanasi.

Earlier on September 12, the Varanasi Court had dismissed a plea of the Anjuman Islamia Masjid committee challenging the maintainability of the suit filed by five Hindu women seeking worshipping rights in the Gyanvapi mosque compound. (ANI)

Read More:https://lokmarg.com/

Slaughterhouse Diary I

Slaughterhouse Diary I: Pushed to pulling


is a former employee of AQ Frozen Foods Pvt. Ltd, an abattoir in Uttar Pradesh’s Amroha district now closed down for various irregularities as per a state order. Alam is 50, and has to now earn his living as a rickshaw puller in Amroha town.

I can never forget the fateful morning of July 28 last year, when I went to the factory and found the gates sealed, along with a notice pasted on it from the DM (district magistrate) Sahib’s office. Colleagues told me that local Bharatiya Janata Party leaders had complained about some irregularities in the abattoir to get even with Bahujan Samaj Party leader Naseemuddin Siddiqui (now expelled from the party, Siddiqui was allegedly a part owner of the unit).

The Yogi government was quick to oblige. My fate too was sealed. When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers. Nearly 400 men lost their livelihood at one stroke of Yogi’s ‘knife’. I want to ask you who is the real butcher? Now, at 50, I am forced to pull a rickshaw in the town area, which hardly matches the income and comfort of the life in the company.

In my five years at the slaughterhouse, I had learnt the art of skinning the animals. I was taking home about Rs 5,000 every month. My friends told me I could earn double the amount if I proved my skills at abattoirs in bigger towns. My three sons also chipped in with odd jobs. We lived a decent life, including weekly off days to be with family. Now a day off from work means loss of precious earnings. Already my income is half of what I earned in the factory. I make Rs 100-150 a day.

Nobody pays generously to a rickshaw puller in a place like Amroha. The work is back-breaking labour of 12 hours, in harsh sun or bitter cold. What else can I do? I am illiterate and have no skills to find another job. Some of my colleagues who lost their jobs took to carpenter shops here but with too many of us on the road, jobs are few and far between. Some (of the ex-workers) have migrated to different states to work as farm labour, but they are young men with small families.

I have a large family (three sons and two daughters-in-law), it will be difficult for us to move. It is important that I stay here. Only good thing is that hard times have made my sons more responsible. They now take their odd jobs seriously and contribute towards the expenses of the family. My wife too, after her household work, uses a cot to lay out pan masala and tobacco sachets for sale.

The earning is not much, but every penny helps. I often run into my former boss at the factory, a kind-hearted man. He tells me to remain positive as the Allahabad (High) Court is seized of the matter and, Insha Allah, the factory will re-open soon. One thing has still not changed from the old times. After calling it a day, I visit the chai shop outside the factory to catch up with my old colleagues.

There, over warm tea in small plastic cups, we remember our heydays in the factory. Some have left the town, but there are still less than a dozen of us who still meet up in the evening and pray together for the re-opening of the abattoir.


More From the Slaughterhouse Diary
Part II: A School Reborn
Part III: Blossoms of Hope

-With editorial assistance from Lokmarg