Chand Patel v Bismillah Begum (2008) - Case Analysis

Introduction of Chand Patel v Bismillah Begum (2008)

Chand Patel v Bismillah Begum (2008) is an important case regarding the issue of whether a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. The case revolves around the legal status of the marriage between the Appellant, Chand Patel and his second wife Respondent, Bismillah Begum. The Supreme Court in its decision on 14th March, 2008 held that even in an irregular marriage, the wife has the right to maintenance as long as the marriage has not been declared void by a competent court.

Download Chand Patel v Bismillah Begum (2008)

Historical Context and Facts of Chand Patel v Bismillah Begum (2008)

The case at hand centres around whether a divorced Muslim woman can claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. The following are the brief facts of the case -

Background and Facts of the Case

The Appellant Chand Patel initially got married to Mustaq Bee. The Appellant in 1993 married Mustaq Bee’s sister with her consent Bismillah Begum (Respondent No. 1). In 1995, they became parents to daughter Tehman Bano (Respondent No. 2).

Application for Maintenance

The Respondent No. 1, Bismillah Begum, contended that she and her daughter Respondent No. 2 Tehman Bano were neglected and unsupported by the Appellant Chand Patel. The Respondent No. 1 filed an application for maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The Appellant denied having married to Respondent No. 1.

Decision of the Trial Court

The Trial Court rejected the defence of the Appellant Chand Patel. The Court held that Respondent No. 1 Bismillah Begum was indeed his wife and Respondent No. 2 Tehman Bano was his daughter. The Court directed the Appellant to pay Rs. 1,000 per month to Respondent No. 1 Bismillah Begum as life support maintenance and also directed maintenance for Tehman Bano until she reached adulthood.

Decision of the District & Session Judge

Aggrieved by the decision of the Trial Court the Appellant Chand Patel filed an appeal. However, the District & Session Judge upheld the decision of the Trial Court. The Court concluded that the Appellant is obligated to maintain his wife and children. The Court also ruled that the duty of the Appellant to provide maintenance remained until a competent court declared the marriage void.

Decision of the High Court

The Appellant challenged the decision of the District and Session’s Judge in the Court. The High Court accepted the dissolution document executed between the parties but also considered the fact that they had lived together for 9 years as husband and wife. The High Court found no merit in the appeal of the Appellant Chand Patel and dismissed both appeals under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

Appeal in the Supreme Court

The Appellant aggrieved by the decisions of the lower courts approached the Supreme Court and filed an appeal.

Issue addressed in Chand Patel v Bismillah Begum (2008)

The main question which was addressed in this case was whether the marriage with the wife’s sister may be irregular or void and is she entitled to maintenance after divorce?

Legal Provisions involved in Chand Patel v Bismillah Begum (2008)

In the Chand Patel case Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 played a significant role. The following is the analysis of this provisions -

Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code

Section 125 deals with the order for Maintenance of Wives, Children and Parents. It states that-

• A Magistrate may order a person with sufficient means to provide monthly maintenance if they neglect or refuse to support:
  • their wife who is unable to support herself
  • their minor child (legitimate or illegitimate)
  • their adult child (if disabled)
  • their father or mother who are unable to support themselves.
• During proceedings, interim maintenance and expenses may also be ordered with applications to be resolved within 60 days of notice.
• If the person fails to comply, the Magistrate can issue a warrant for the amount due, enforceable by fines or imprisonment up to one month.
• Section 125 of the Code also states certain conditions which are as follows-
• A wife is not entitled to maintenance if-
  • she lives in adultery
  • refuses to live with her husband without cause or 
  • lives separately by mutual consent
• Orders may be canceled if the wife later lives in adultery or refuses to cohabit without cause

Judgment and Impact of Chand Patel v Bismillah Begum (2008)

The Supreme Court in the Chand Patel case highlighted the necessity to clarify the legal status of the marriage between the Respondent No.1 Bismillah Begum and Appellant Chand Patel as it was important to determine the right to maintenance. 

The Supreme Court cited the Tajbi Abalal Desai v. Mowla Alikhan Desai (1917) case. In this case it was held that such marriages are irregular, not void and could become lawful if the first wife dies or divorces the husband. The Supreme Court after reviewing related judgments agreed with this view.

The Supreme Court held that the marriage between the Appellant Chand Patel and Respondent No. 1 Bismillah Begum remains valid since it has not been declared void by any court. Therefore, the Respondent Bismillah Begum is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC (Now Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023). The Supreme Court also directed the Appellant Chand Patel to pay Rs. 10,000/- to the Respondent No. 1 as the cost of litigation.

Conclusion

In Chand Patel v Bismillah Begum (2008) the Supreme Court affirmed the right of a wife even in an irregular marriage to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC. The Court held that such marriages, while irregular, are not void unless declared so by a competent court. The Court also directed the Appellant to pay Rs. 10,000 towards the cost of litigation.