Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum

Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum & Ors. (1985), commonly referred to as the Shah Bano case, was a criminal lawsuit in India, in which the Supreme Court delivered a judgment in favour of providing maintenance (alimony) to an aggrieved divorced Muslim woman, Shah Bano Begum from Indore, who had been divorced by her husband Mohammed Ahmed Khan in 1978.

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind (JUH) mounted a campaign for the verdict's nullification. The judgement in favour of the woman in this case evoked criticisms among Muslims, some of whom cited the Quran to show that the judgement was in conflict with Islamic law. It triggered controversy about the extent of having different personal laws for different religions in India.

The case caused the Congress government under Rajiv Gandhi, with its absolute majority, to pass the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act 1986, which diluted the judgment of the Supreme Court and restricted the right of Muslim divorcées to alimony from their former husbands for only 90 days after the divorce (the period of iddat in Islamic law), shifting the responsibility of maintaining woman to her relatives or the waqf boards. The law was seen as discriminatory as it denied the right to basic maintenance available to Muslim women under secular law. However, in later judgements including the Danial Latifi v. Union of India (2001) case and Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan (2015), the Supreme Court of India interpreted the act in a manner reassuring the validity of the case and consequently upheld the Shah Bano judgement, and The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act 1986 was nullified. Some Muslims, including the All India Shia Personal Law Board (AISPLB), supported the Supreme Court's order to make the right to maintenance of a divorced Muslim wife absolute.