Introduction
Maintenance, or nafqah in Islamic jurisprudence, is not merely a financial duty but a moral and legal responsibility bestowed upon the husband. It forms the foundation of marital sustenance and continues to remain a subject of evolving legal discourse, particularly in the Indian context. While the Quran and Hadith establish the principle of maintenance as a divine obligation, India's legal system — shaped by constitutional ideals, judicial pronouncements, and statutory interventions — has layered additional dimensions onto this Islamic principle.
The distinction between maintenance during the subsistence of marriage and post-divorce maintenance is crucial to understand, especially in light of the socio-legal developments over the past few decades. With landmark cases like Shah Bano and progressive interpretations in Danial Latifi, the Indian judiciary has actively intervened to harmonize Muslim personal law with constitutional guarantees of dignity, equality, and justice. This blog explores these dimensions thoroughly and provides an analytical view of the principles, laws, and reforms surrounding maintenance under Muslim law before and after divorce.
Maintenance During Marriage: A Quranic and Legal Duty
Under Muslim law, a husband is obligated to provide for his wife during the continuance of the marriage. This obligation includes providing for food, clothing, shelter, and other essentials, proportional to his financial ability. The Quran emphasizes this in Surah At-Talaq (65:7): “Let the man of wealth spend according to his means, and the man whose resources are restricted, let him spend according to what Allah has given him.”
This verse not only mandates financial support but also reflects the ethical foundation of equitable living. If a husband neglects his duty, the wife has the right to approach a court for maintenance or even seek dissolution of marriage under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939. Indian courts have held that a wife need not prove actual destitution to claim maintenance — what matters is whether she is being reasonably provided for.
During marriage, maintenance also plays a preventive role — preventing abuse, abandonment, or neglect — and acts as a reflection of the dignity and stability expected within the marital institution. As seen in judgments such as Usman Khan v. Fathima Bi (1978), the courts have reinforced that the standard of living and necessity must be judged not by income alone but by societal norms and fairness.
(🔗 Read more about judicial divorce under the 1939 Act here)
Maintenance After Divorce: Between Classical Law and Constitutional Justice
The most contested issue in Muslim law arises after the dissolution of marriage — how long and to what extent is the husband liable to maintain the divorced wife? Traditional interpretations limit the maintenance period strictly to the iddat — approximately three months post-divorce — as stipulated in the Quran (2:241): “For divorced women is a provision according to what is fair. This is a duty upon the righteous.”
However, the debate lies in interpreting the phrase “according to what is fair.” Classical jurists took a narrow view, limiting the obligation to the iddat period, while modern scholars and constitutional courts have increasingly adopted a broader interpretation. In the Indian context, this conflict came to the fore in the Shah Bano case, where the Supreme Court upheld a divorced Muslim woman's right to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC, a secular provision designed to prevent vagrancy.
By ruling that a Muslim woman, like any other, is entitled to maintenance if she is unable to maintain herself post-divorce, the court upheld not just a woman's right to livelihood but also emphasized the overriding power of constitutional values over personal law when it comes to basic human rights.
Statutory Interventions: The 1986 Act and Judicial Interpretation
In response to the backlash from conservative Muslim sections, the government introduced the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, which attempted to restrict a husband's obligation to maintain his divorced wife only during the iddat period. At first glance, this appeared regressive and aimed at undoing the liberal precedent set in Shah Bano.
However, the judiciary once again stepped in to ensure constitutional balance. In Danial Latifi v. Union of India (2001), the Supreme Court interpreted the Act to mean that although the husband must make provisions “within the iddat period,” the amount he is required to provide must be sufficient for the woman’s future sustenance, and not just for the duration of iddat.
This interpretation transformed a potentially restrictive law into one that aligned with Quranic principles of fairness and the constitutional mandate of Article 14 and Article 21. Thus, Indian courts expanded the legal understanding of maintenance beyond traditional boundaries while remaining faithful to the spirit of Islamic law.
(🔗 Explore the full debate around the Muslim Women Act, 2019 here)
Forms of Divorce and Impact on Maintenance
Maintenance rights may vary slightly depending on the form of divorce under Muslim law. In the case of Talaq, where the divorce is initiated by the husband, his obligation to provide maintenance is non-negotiable for the iddat period and may extend further depending on judicial directions. In Khula (divorce initiated by the wife with the husband's consent) or Mubarat (mutual divorce), the terms of separation may include negotiated settlements, often involving the return of mahr and waiver of maintenance.
Yet, courts have emphasized that even in these cases, any clause waiving a woman’s right to maintenance is not enforceable if she lacks financial independence. The spirit of Islamic law — as reflected in Prophet Muhammad’s dealings and in Quranic verses — is to protect the vulnerable party, particularly the woman, in matters of family breakdown.
(🔗 Understand Khula and Talaq-e-Tafweez in our blog here)
(🔗 Read more about Mubarat: Mutual Divorce here)
Iddat and Maintenance: Misconceptions and Realities
A common misunderstanding is that once iddat ends, the husband is free from all financial obligations toward his former wife. This is not entirely accurate, especially in the light of court interpretations. The obligation to provide “reasonable and fair provision” may have to be fulfilled during iddat, but the support itself can and must be for her life ahead.
The iddat period itself is a time when the wife retains certain rights — including residence in the matrimonial home, full financial support, and in some cases, psychological and medical care. These elements, often ignored, underscore that iddat is not merely a waiting period but a protected transition phase grounded in compassion and equity.
(🔗 More about iddat period in detail here)
Conclusion
Maintenance under Muslim law represents more than a monthly allowance — it reflects a woman’s right to dignity, stability, and survival, both during and after marriage. Although classical Islamic texts may suggest temporal limits, their broader ethical message emphasizes insaf (justice), ihsan (compassion), and maslaha (public interest). Indian jurisprudence, through a careful blend of personal law and constitutional scrutiny, has gradually expanded the scope of maintenance to uphold these values.
As Muslim family law continues to evolve in India, it is essential that reforms be guided not only by religious sensitivity but also by an uncompromising commitment to gender justice. Maintenance must never be seen as charity — it is a legal, ethical, and spiritual obligation rooted in the sacred relationship of marriage and its aftermath.
To delve deeper into how these maintenance debates originated and were reshaped by one of India’s most debated cases, read it here — Maintenance of Divorced Muslim Women: Shah Bano Case to Muslim Women Act, 1986.
