Critical Analysis Of Shayara Bano V. Union Of India

Sanya Kashyap, Vivekananda School of Law and Legal Studies, VIPS, New Delhi

Date of Judgement:

22nd August 2017

Judges Bench: Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar

Justice S. Abdul Nazeer

Justice Rohinton Fali Niraman

Justice Uday Umesh Lalit

Justice K.M. Joseph

Facts

The petitioner Shayara Bano was divorced by her husband (respondent) – Rizwan Ahmed by pronouncement of ‘Talaq-e-biddat’ on 10.10.2015 in the presence of two witnesses. The petitioner and respondent were married on 11.04.2001 as per ‘Shariat’. The matrimonial relationship between the parties resulted in the births of a son and a daughter. On 09.04.2015, the petitioner left her matrimonial home with her children in the company of her father and maternal uncle to live in her parental home. The respondent claims that he continued to visit the petitioner and send her maintenance. The petitioner refused to return back to her matrimonial home at several instances. The petitioner claims that soon after the marriage the Respondent husband started demanding for additional dowry and made unreasonable demands for a car and cash. The Petitioner who rightfully denied the demands of the Respondent was tortured and physically abused by the Respondent and his family. She was often beaten and kept hungry in a closed room for days. The family of the Respondent administered her with medicines that caused her memory to fade. Due to the medicines she remained unconscious for long hours. On 09.04.2015, the Respondent attempted to kill the Petitioner by administering medicines which were reveal by a doctor to cause loss of mental imbalance. The Respondent brought the Petitioner to Moradabad in a critical near-death condition with the intention of abandoning her if his dowry demands were not fulfilled. On 10.04.2015, the respondent told the parents of the petitioner to taker their daughter or fulfil his demands for more dowry of Rs. 5,00,000/-. The Petitioner’s parents came to take her and she was forced to stay with her parents after 10.04.2015. The Respondent had filed for restitution despite the fact that he himself had asked the Petitioner wife’s father to either fulfil his dowry demands or to take the Petitioner back to her maternal home. It is the case of the respondent that the petitioner was not ready for reconciliation and therefore withdrew the suit and served upon her a ‘talaq-nama’ dated 10.10.2015.