Bollywood’s latest release, ‘Haq’, features Yami Gautam in a powerful portrayal of Shah Bano Begum, a pivotal figure who reshaped India’s understanding of justice. The film chronicles the extraordinary life of this 62-year-old mother of five from Indore, whose personal struggle for dignity in 1978 ignited a national debate. Her fight for basic rights escalated into one of India’s most significant legal battles, resonating through the Supreme Court, Parliament, and even impacting broader socio-political discussions.
Inspired by the landmark 1985 Supreme Court judgment, ‘Haq’ has already courted controversy, with Shah Bano’s daughter reportedly filing a case over the alleged unauthorized use of her mother’s story. The film, which also stars Emraan Hashmi, delves into the complexities of personal law and women’s rights in India.
The narrative begins with Shah Bano’s husband, advocate Mohammed Ahmad Khan, ending their 43-year marriage with a triple talaq in 1978. After a brief period of financial support, he ceased payments, leaving Bano destitute. Her ensuing legal battle for maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) challenged prevailing norms. While a local court initially ordered a modest monthly sum, the Madhya Pradesh High Court increased it, a decision her husband appealed to the Supreme Court.
The apex court’s 1985 verdict declared Section 125 a secular law applicable to all citizens, emphasizing its role in preventing destitution and upholding women’s dignity. This ruling affirmed a divorced Muslim woman’s right to maintenance beyond the ‘iddat’ period if she remained unable to support herself. The judgment also highlighted the unfulfilled promise of a Uniform Civil Code.
The Supreme Court’s decision sparked widespread protests from certain sections of the Muslim community, who viewed it as an infringement on religious law. Consequently, the government enacted the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, which effectively superseded the court’s ruling by limiting maintenance provisions to the ‘iddat’ period. This era also saw the opening of the Babri Masjid gates, marking another significant turning point in India’s political and religious landscape.
Years later, the constitutional validity of the 1986 Act was re-examined. In 2001, the Supreme Court provided a broader interpretation, ensuring that maintenance awarded during the ‘iddat’ period must be sufficient for the woman’s lifetime unless she remarries, thus preserving the spirit of the original Shah Bano judgment. The debate continued until 2024, when the Supreme Court definitively ruled in Mohd. Abdul Samad vs The State of Telangana that the 1986 Act does not preclude women from seeking maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC, allowing for a choice between or combination of both legal avenues.
Shah Bano’s enduring legacy, nearly four decades later, continues to provoke national introspection on justice and dignity, demonstrating how a personal quest can transform into a profound national conversation.
