BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF $§3§g§g ”émrh CHHATTIsGARH AT BILASPUR (c.G.) T CR.M.P,No. 123 /2006 Pg ITION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CRIMINA PROCEDURE CODE 1973 ‘ Ku Rehana, aged about 8 (minor) D/o. Mehtab Khan, through — natural guardian — mother Smt. Islam—Bee, Smt Islam Bee, aged about 45 years, wife of Mehtab Khan, ocCupation 4 dependent / domestic wife Both are resident of Maszid Para, Dharamjaigarh, P.S. & Tahsil Dharam'jai’garh. District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS ,RESPONDENTS 1. ii Mehtab Khan, S/o Ahmad Khan, (IL aged about 46 years, occupation — Government Teacher, Government Schooi. CéuR'V’ fFE' ,v, f ' 5’ 2.‘ 1i Baseer Khan, son of Ahmed Bax, V (. aged about 50 years, 3. Gulam Bee aiias Divya Xalxo, ii «Bi . i\ii)i‘\ «by wife of Mehtab Khan, aged about 35 years, : ;A44 L‘ g A @ All are resident of Maszid Par, '..,‘Dl‘ha’ramjaigarh, P.S. and Tah. DEéiramjaigarh, District Raigarh (CG) a HIaEH CGUR OE HH£§WE€2¥1RE£ AT EELASPUR ‘ ’E‘ “ CS SB : HONIBLE MR. JIESTECE PRETINKER BEWAKER CR.M.P.2m. 1223;213:246 ?ET!TIONERS Ku.Rehana €35 Aaother V€rSuS ‘ r RESPaEDENTs Mehtab Khan 3i. Others @f Shn' A.N . Bhakta, counsd for the patitionars. Shn‘ NKChattexjw, counw} £ar r€sp0nden€$. 3 PETETEpN UNDER SECTEGIW 482 (9F 'E‘HE CR.P.C. " $RBER The present petition. filed !1nd€r' Section 482 Cr.P.C. arises out of the order dated 24.5.06 (Alinexure P] 1) passed by the first Additionai Sessions Judge, Rajgarh in Cr.Rev. No. 235/2004 whereby 1eameti revisional Cmu‘t has COmErmed me order dated 9.834 passe& by the Judicia} Magistrate Fii‘st Class, Dharamjaigarh m M.Cr.C. No. 44J99 dismissmg the appEcation as feed by the applicants umier Sectioe 125 of the Cr.P.C §a4.08.261a3 2. . Both the parties very fairly submit that the Courts below have rejected the application 0f the appiicaets mainly on the ground that the appEcaln No.2 is a divorcee. Muslim iatiy anti therefore she is net entitled for any maintenance. it has bee}: submitted that in View of the latest decision of the Apex Coutt m the matter of Sha&1ma Rana Vs. Imrayt Khazl I‘egyorted in {2010} $CC 665} wherein it has been heid that even the divorcee Mush‘m Woman is entitleri to claim maintenance from f her has‘banci untier Section 125 Cr.P.C. after the expiiy cf the \x period of iddat aiso as tong as she (ices not remanjv. 3 X have heard counsel for the paa‘ties aad perused the order and the impugried iudgment. / . 4. Now, it is well settled that even if a Mush'm woman has been divorced, she would be entitled to claim majetenance from her husband under Section 125 Cr‘P‘C. after the expiry of period of iddat also, aS long as she does not remarry. 5. In View of this, the order dated 24.5.06 (Annexuie P,’ 1) passed by the revisional Court as wed as the order of the Magistrate dated 9.8.04 {Aimexure P/2§ are quashed. As a necessary consequence thereof, the matter is remanded to the ma Court, Dharamjaigarh for its disposal afresh on merits at an early date in accordance with law. The parties will appear before the court below on 6th of September 20 10. 3 s