Author: Syed Shahabuddin,
New Delhi
Publication: The Hindu
Date: June 21, 2000
Sir, - The Panigrahi
judgment has taken us back to the position that existed at the time of
Chandarchud's judgment in the Shah Bano case.
The fact is that the
very purpose, rightly or wrongly, of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights
on Divorce) Act was to nullify the Chandrachud judgment which was not only
based on a fallacious interpretation of the Quran but was legally flawed,
because it ignored the 1971 amendments to the Cr. P.C. which had introduced
Section 127(3)(c) and had, in effect, exempted the Muslim community from
the operation of Section 125.
It is one thing to provide
that apart from the maintenance for the period of iddat, a Muslim divorcee
should be made a suitable provision which would enable her to reestablish
herself and it is totally different to redefine the iddat period, against
the express provision of the Shariat and the tradition of the last 14 centuries.
