A divorced Muslim woman can seek maintenance under both the Muslim Women Protection Act and Section 125 of Cr.P.C. until remarriage, reinforcing her rights to fair provision post-divorce.

JUDGMENT :

KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J.

Both the original petition and the revision petition are connected, and I am disposing of them by a common judgment.

2. The revision petition arose out of an order passed by the Family Court, Tirur in a petition filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. and the original petition arose out of an order passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Tirur (for short, 'the Magistrate Court') and confirmed by the Additional Sessions Court-III, Manjeri under Section 3 (1) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (for short, 'the Muslim Women Protection Act, 1986').

3. The petitioner in both matters is the husband of respondent No.1 and father of respondent No.2 (in RP(FC) No.155 of 2015). The parties are Muslims and governed by Muslim Personal Law. The marriage and paternity are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner divorced respondent No.1 on 13.04.2011 by pronouncing talaq and the respondent No.1 remarried on 07.08.2014. After the divorce, the respondent No.1 filed a petition under Section 3 (1) of the Muslim Women Protection Act, 1986 before the Magistrate Court as M.C.No.318 of 2011 against the petitioner, claiming maintenance during the iddat period, reasonable and fair provision for future maintenance and for the return of gold ornaments. During the pendency of the said petition before the Magistrate Court, respondent No.1 filed M.C.No. 764 of 2013 against the petitioner before the Family Court, Tirur, claiming maintenance for herself and for the respondent No.2 (in RP(FC) No.155 of 2015) under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. The petition filed before the Family Court under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. and the petition filed before the Magistrate Court under Section 3 (1) of the Muslim Women Protection Act, 1986 were parallelly proceeded with.

4. After trial, the Family Court disposed of M.C.No.764 of 2013 first, granting monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs. 3,000/- to the respondent No.1 and Rs. 2,000/- to the respondent No.2 (in RP(FC) No.155 of 2015) from the date of the petition. Since respondent No. 1 remarried, it was ordered that she is entitled to receive maintenance only up to the date of remarriage, i.e., August 7, 2014. Thereafter, the Magistrate Court disposed of M.C.No.318 of 2011, directing the petitioner to pay Rs. 24,000/- to the respondent No.1 towards her maintenance during iddat period and Rs. 3,18,133/- towards reasonable and fair provision and maintenance. The petitioner was also directed to return 7½ sovereigns of Mahar or pay Rs. 1,57,500/-, the value equivalent to the same. The petitioner challenged the order in M.C.No.318 of 2011 before the Additional Sessions Court-III, Manjeri (for short, 'the revisional court') in Crl.R.P.No. 5 of 2017. The revisional court allowed the revision in part and modified the order passed by the Magistrate Court. The petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 15,000/- towards maintenance during iddat period to the respondent No.1 and Rs. 2,00,000/- towards reasonable and fair provision and maintenance. The relief of an amount equivalent to Mahar granted by the Magistrate Court was set aside. O.P.(Crl.) No. 424 of 2025 has been preferred by the petitioner challenging the order passed by the Magistrate Court as well as the revisional court under Section 3 (1) of the Muslim Women Protection Act, 1986. RP(FC) No. 155 of 2015 has been preferred, challenging the order passed by the Family Court, Tirur under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.

5. I have heard Sri. Mohamed Ravuf K.K., the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.T.K.Ajith Kumar, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1.

6. As already stated, marriage, paternity, and the pronouncement of talaq are not in dispute. Under the pri