Basant,J.

How is the expression "does not treat her equitably in accordance with the injunctions of the Quran" in Sec.2(viii)(f) of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act') to be understood in law? Whose standards are to apply and prevail? Is it the partisan standards of the polygamous husband to be followed? Is it the cold objective standards of the court -an outsider, to be followed? Or is it the assessment and evaluation of the helpless wife to be reckoned as crucial? Should not that expression consistent with the humane socialist commitment of the constitution in favour of the helpless and hapless receive a construction in favour of the wife in distress? Can the expression be understood divorced of the core Islamic approach to life and marriage that marriage is an arrangement to be enjoyed and not to be endured reckoning the same as indissoluble? Should not the true perception of the right to life, in all its dimensions, persuade a court to give the expression the widest possible amplitude to liberate the wife in distress from her demeaning status of a `sapathni' (co-wife) - wife-in-law (husband's wife) is a crude translati