In a significant development in the ongoing legal dispute between Indian cricketer Mohammed Shami and his estranged wife Hasin Jahan, the Calcutta High Court has directed the pacer to pay a total monthly alimony of ₹4 lakh—₹1.5 lakh to Jahan and ₹2.5 lakh to their daughter—as interim maintenance.
High Court Revises Lower Court Order
The order, passed by Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee on Tuesday, revises an earlier ruling by a district sessions court that had fixed monthly payments of ₹50,000 to Jahan and ₹80,000 to their daughter.
“In my considered opinion, a sum of ₹1,50,000 per month to the petitioner No. 1 (wife) and ₹2,50,000 to her daughter would be just, fair and reasonable to ensure financial stability for both the petitioners, till disposal of the main application,” the High Court order stated.
The court also noted that Shami, based on his financial disclosures and earning potential, was capable of paying a higher amount of maintenance than what was previously ordered. It emphasized that Jahan, who remains unmarried and is raising their daughter independently, deserves a standard of living comparable to what she experienced during the marriage.
Additionally, the court clarified that Shami is free to voluntarily assist with educational or other reasonable expenses for his daughter beyond the fixed monthly amount.
Background: Domestic Violence and Other Allegations
The couple married in April 2014, but their relationship soured over time, leading to a First Information Report (FIR) filed by Hasin Jahan in March 2018 at the Jadavpur police station. Jahan accused Shami and his family of domestic violence, mental and physical torture, and dowry harassment under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence (PWDV) Act, 2005.
She also made sensational allegations of match-fixing and claimed Shami had abandoned his financial responsibilities, leaving her to shoulder all family expenses.
In her plea, Jahan had sought ₹7 lakh per month as personal maintenance and ₹3 lakh for her daughter. However, the magistrate court had initially dismissed her request for monetary relief to herself and ordered only ₹80,000 for their daughter’s maintenance. Upon appeal, this was modified to include ₹50,000 for Jahan and ₹80,000 for the child.
High Court’s Rationale
Justice Mukherjee ruled that the lower court’s assessment required revision. The judge cited relevant case law and stated:
“The wife is entitled to a levelled maintenance that she enjoyed during the continuance of marriage and which reasonably secures her future as well as the future of the child.”
The case remains under legal review, and the ₹4 lakh monthly payment is a temporary measure until the court arrives at a final decision in the matter.
This order marks a significant development not just in the personal lives of the individuals involved but also reinforces the judiciary’s stance on ensuring financial protection for women and children in domestic disputes—especially in high-profile cases involving public figures.
