A.V. SAVANT, J.:---This criminal writ petition is filed by a divorced muslim woman. In view of the reference to a Division Bench by T.K. Chandrasekhara Das, J., the following questions of law arise for our determination :---

(1) In proceedings for maintenance instituted by a Muslim wife, if a muslim husband makes a plea in his written statement that his marriage had been dissolved at an earlier date in the talak form, even assuming that the fact of such dissolution at an earlier date is not proved, whether the filing of the written statement containing such a plea of divorce in the talak form amounts to the dissolution of marriage under the Muslim Personal Law from the date on which such a statement was made ?

(2) Whether the law laid down by this Court in (Chandbi Ex. w/o Badesha Mujawar v. Badesha S/o Balwant Mujawar)1, reported in A.I.R. 1961 Bom. 121 still holds good or whether it requires reconsideration in view of the two subsequent decisions of this Court in :---

(i) (Mehtabbi w/o Sk. Sikandar and another v. Sk. Sikandar S/o. Sk. Mohd. and another)2, reported in 1995(3) Bom.C.R. 433; and

(ii) (Shaikh Mosin s/o Shaikh Chand v. State of Maharashtra and another)3, reported in 1996(1) Mh.L.J. 810.

(3) What is the extent of the liability of a muslim husband under Clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. (For short, the 1986 Act) ? In other words, whether the liability to make a reasonable and fair provision and pay maintenance is only restricted to the iddat period or whether it extents beyond the iddat period ?

(4) What is the nature of the right given to a divorced muslim woman who has not re-married and who is not able to maintain herself after the iddat period having regard to the provisions of section 4 of the 1986 Act ?

We have heard the learned Counsel Mr. Sonwalkar for the divorced wife: Mr. Ketkar for the husband and Miss Kamath, A.P.P. for the State. In order to answer the above questions, a few relevant facts may be stated.

2. The petitioner-wife had filed Misc. Application No. 61 of 1980 under section 125 of the Code of criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Code') for maintenance against respondent No. 1 husband. By an order dated 26th June 1981 the Magistrate fixed the amount of maintenance at Rs. 60/- p.m. On the 6th October 1986 the wife initiated the present proceedings by filing Maintenance Application No. 297 of 1986 under section 127 of the Code for enhancement of maintenance claiming that she was entitled to Rs. 500/- per month. In the application for enhancement, the wife contended that she was ill-treated by her husband and was driven out of the matrimonial home, pursuant to which she had made an application for maintenance. However, having regard to the general inflationary tendencies; it was not possible for her to maintain herself in the meagre sum of Rs. 60/- per month. She was unwell but was not able to afford the medicines needed by her. She alleged that her husband had improved his financial condition. He had secured a permanent job in the Fire Brigade of Baramati Municipal Council and was earning Rs. 1000/- to Rs. 1200/- per month. He was also trading in cattle in Baramati and Phaltan markets and was earning Rs. 500/- to Rs. 700/- per month. The wife, therefore, claimed that the amount of Rs. 60/- should be enhanced to Rs. 500/- per month.

3. In reply to this Application dated 6-10-1986, the husband filed his written statement on the 11th November, 1987. He denied the allegations made by the wife. He contended that he had already given a talak to his wife on 29-10-1987 and he had informed her by a notice sent by registered post to that effect which was refused by her. He had sent an amount of Rs. 125/- towards Mahr and Rs. 150/- towards maintenance for the iddat period. However, since the wife had refused to accept the said amount, the husband had deposited the said amount in the Magistrates' Court. The husband specifically con