In Daniel Latifi v. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India addressed problems related to the maintenance rights of divorced Muslim women. The petitioner, Daniel Latifi, challenged the constitutional validity of Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which provides for maintenance to wives, children, and parents who are unable to maintain themselves. The petitioner argued that the provision violated the Muslim personal law and, thus, infringed upon the rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court held that Section 125 of the CrPC is a secular provision aimed at achieving social justice and is not violative of Muslim personal law. The judgment reaffirmed the state’s duty to ensure the welfare and maintenance of divorced Muslim women, thereby upholding the principles of gender equality and social justice.
This judgment has clarified the relationship between personal laws and secular legislation. The Court held that Section 125 of the CrPC is a secular provision aimed at ensuring social justice and providing support to financially disadvantaged individuals, including divorced Muslim women. It emphasized that personal laws must conform to constitutional principles, particularly those concerning gender equality and non-discrimination. The decision of Daniel Latifi v. Union of India is a significant milestone in Indian jurisprudence, reinforcing the principle that fundamental rights take precedence over personal laws and highlighting the judiciary’s role in promoting gender equality and social justice.
| Citation | AIR 2001 Supreme Court 3958, 2001 (7) SCC 740 |
| Name of the Court which decided the case | Supreme Court |
| Bench | S. Rajendra Babu, D.P. Mohapatra, Doraiswamy Raju, Shivaraj V. Patil |
| Legislations | Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, Code of Criminal Procedure. 1973 |