Introduction: The Fight for Justice and Dignity
The Shah Bano case, decided in 1985, created a landmark moment in the history of Indian law, particularly regarding the rights of Muslim women. The case involved Shah Bano, a woman who had spent 43 years in marriage and reared five children. At the time of her divorce, she was left with a meagre ₹200 a month and was desperate for maintenance. Shah Bano reached out to the Supreme Court with the hope of gaining a livelihood and upholding her dignity by applying Section 125 of the CrPC, a secular provision devised to provide maintenance for women, children, and elderly individuals unable to support themselves.
The case gained national attention and raised fundamental questions about the relationship between secular law and religious personal laws in India. Shah Bano’s legal battle brought to light the deep-seated inequalities that Muslim women suffered from, not only within their personal lives but also within the legal system. A landmark decision by the Supreme Court, extending her rights to receive maintenance beyond the period of iddah—or the waiting period after divorce under Muslim law—reinforced women’s rights and gender justice. The decision did, however, evoke vehement opposition from certain political and religious groups, and the then-government brought in the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act in 1986 with the express purpose of diluting the Supreme Court judgment.
Decades later, Shah Bano's legacy is being revisited, but not in the manner one would expect. Instead of being celebrated for her courage and determination, her story is now being distorted through commercial interests, particularly in the form of Bollywood's Haq. This film, based on true events according to its claims, is nothing but a dramatised version of Shah Bano’s legal fight. It misrepresents her fight and reduces it to just a single plot point for people's entertainment. The threat is that this will undermine the real value of Shah Bano's legacy and make a legal and social triumph into a commodity for mass consumption.
This article examines how the film misrepresents the Shah Bano case and reflects on broader societal implications, especially the need to preserve the truth and dignity of those whose lives inspired such landmark legal and social change.
The Shah Bano Case: A Legal Milestone for Women’s Rights
Shah Bano Begum's case is considered, in terms of legal history, the turning point for women's rights in India. Shah Bano was left in an unfortunate and unfair position at the time of her divorce. Divorced after 43 years of married life, she was left with less than sufficient financial resources to take care of herself and her five children. According to Muslim personal law, a husband's liability towards his wife ceases after the period of iddah. Shah Bano found this to be insufficient to keep her alive, considering her age and financial dependence on her husband.
Shah Bano took the case to court, seeking maintenance from her ex-husband, and invoked Section 125 of the CrPC, a clause in Indian law intended to provide support to those who are unable to support themselves, regardless of their religion. The case finally found its way to the Supreme Court of India in 1985. The judgment passed was a landmark. It laid down that Muslim woman, like all other women in India, have recourse to maintenance under that section over and above the iddah period if they are unable to maintain themselves. What this judgment did was to clarify that secular laws have precedence in matters of social justice over religious laws and that a divorced woman's right to maintenance was not dependent upon her religion.
The judgment was hailed as a victory for the women’s rights movement because it upheld the principle of gender justice and equality before the law as enshrined in the Constitution of India. It also focused attention on the plight of Muslim women, whose rights under personal laws were grossly inadequate to secure for them a decent standard of living upon divorce. But the judgment also generated a furor of opposition, particularly among the conservative sections of the minority community, who resented what they saw as an attempt at eroding Islamic practices. The government of India, with Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi as its head, then quickly passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, which tried to restrict the operation of the Supreme Court judgment by restricting the liability of maintenance to the iddah period.
While this act was a setback in the eyes of many, it also triggered broader debates on personal laws, secularism, and the requirement for a Uniform Civil Code in India. It has remained one of the most critical points of reference for deliberations on women's rights, religious freedom, and reforms in Indian law.
The Release of Haq: A Distorted Portrayal
The release of the Bollywood film Haq in 2025, which states that it is “inspired by true events,” has been widely scrutinized since it was said to be associated with the Shah Bano case. The plot of the film, featuring a Muslim woman who fought for maintenance after her divorce, truly reflects what happened in the Shah Bano case. On the other hand, this has been totally opposed by Shah Bano’s daughter, Siddiqua Begum Khan, who has expressed outrage over the fictionalization of her mother’s life and legal fight.
Siddiqua fears that the film has misinterpreted major details of her mother's struggle. According to her, the film has misrepresented the factual elements of Shah Bano's case and, as such, has deprecated the very spirit of her mother's crusade for justice. She said the film dramatizes her mother's name and legal struggle into a commercialized fiction, believing it demeans the dignity and struggle of her mother's fight for maintenance. With emotion, Siddiqua highlighted that her mother's struggle was situated and based on faith, integrity, and a feeling of injustice—something quite different from sensations created for box-office returns.
Furthermore, Siddiqua's critique brings up an ethical issue right at the core of the film: using real-life struggles for the sake of entertainment. The filmmakers have added a disclaimer stating that the events in the film are fiction, but Siddiqua argues that this cannot and will not protect her mother's dignity. Most audience members do not pay attention to this, and the film publicity explicitly links the story with Shah Bano's legal battle. That, according to Siddiqua, creates a misleading connection between the fictional events and her family's real-life experience.
The portrayal in the film raises very important questions about the ethical responsibility of filmmakers when they seek to make representations of real-life events, especially those that are personal and painful. Siddiqua's legal challenge to the release speaks to the respect of the legacies of individuals, particularly those who have been part of larger social struggles.
Legal and Ethical Implications: Privacy and Posthumous Dignity
At the root of the litigation against Haq is a deep question: does the dignity and privacy of an individual remain right after death? The petition Siddiqua filed in court to block the release of the film was based on the contention that the filmmakers' depiction of her mother's life violated her mother's right to dignity and privacy after death. In a culture where the lives of public figures often end up as entertainment, the case raised larger questions about the rights of the dead and their families to control how legacies are represented.
However, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh rejected Siddiqua's petition and held that the right to privacy and publicity are not inheritable in nature, and they do not extend beyond one's death. The decision is part of a jurisprudence that favors freedom of expression and the right of the public to receive information and media over rights exercisable posthumously. Although the ruling was grounded on established legal precedents, difficult questions remain about the extent to which families should be able to regulate portrayals of their loved ones after their deaths, particularly when it concerns their dignity.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Photo: PTI
To Siddiqua, the court's dismissal was a painful reminder that the rights of the individual, or those that have passed, are usually sacrificed for the benefits of creative freedom and public consumption. She believes that her mother's dignity should have been maintained and that the filmmakers should treat her mother's name and legacy with more care. The case has wider implications for the protection of personal privacy in the entertainment industry and calls for a more balanced approach that respects the rights of the filmmakers but also preserves the dignity of the individuals whose lives they portray.
The Real Legacy of Shah Bano: A Fight for Justice, Not Sensationalism
Shah Bano's real legacy runs much deeper than is represented in Haq. Her legal fight was not merely one for maintenance but one against the system, which often denied women their due share of justice, equality, and dignity. Her case assumed dimensions beyond the legal context of being viewed as a struggle of Muslim women for their rights in India—a struggle that the silent operation of the legal system had overlooked for decades. Shah Bano, by fighting for her right to maintenance, became a trendsetter in the fight for gender equality in India's Muslim community.
That was the legacy rooted in her dedication to Islamic ideals, which aim at fairness, justice, and protection for those who are weak in defending themselves. The fight was not against religion but for the proper application of religious tenets that speak of women's rights. Haq distorts this very legacy into a commercially consumable device, reducing Shah Bano's seminal fight to a plot point in a fictionalized drama.
This misrepresentation is an insult to the dignity of Shah Bano's fight and threatens to demean the significance of social and legal reform brought about by her case. Other than recognizing her struggle, the movie converts it into a commodity for mass consumption that could mislead the younger generation about the actual character of her struggle and its repercussions for women's rights.
The real legacy of Shah Bano lies in the fact that she pursued justice and equality relentlessly. Shah Bano struggled not for fame or any acknowledgment; rather, she struggled to develop women's rights in her community through reformist calls against obsolete practices that would benefit future generations of women. In this light, the cinematic rendition of her struggle serves to obfuscate the truth and deflect attention from the real issues involved in the heart of the litigation.
Impact on Society: The Need for Respectful Representation
The Haq controversy is only a symptom of the grave disorderliness plaguing the entertainment industry—film producers' moral obligations toward the representation of real-life incidents and persons. Filmmakers often invoke creative freedom, but in instances where the subjects are real-life persons, that freedom should be balanced against notions of responsibility. The case of Shah Bano reinforces the fact that the lives of individuals, particularly those embroiled in social and legal struggles, should not be used for monetary gain or popular amusement.
Through the criticism of the film, Siddiqua brought up an important point: the dignity of those whose stories is told must be maintained. Filmmakers must also make sure that real people's lives are not sensationalized or fictionalized for the sake of drama. While creative freedom is crucial in the arts, it should not be at the expense of truth and integrity. By being respectful of actual stories of individuals and the struggles they go through, filmmakers can create narratives that would honor their subjects and inspire positive change within society.
Conclusion: Preserving the Truth for Future Generations
The legal battle fought by Shah Bano in 1985 was not just about securing maintenance; it was about availing justice and dignity to women, especially from the poorest sections of society. Shah Bano's case has had lasting repercussions for women's rights in India, but films like Haq misrepresent her struggle and could blur her legacy while minimizing the meaning of her fight.
Siddiqua Begum Khan's attempt to save her mother's dignity is not a personal issue but an appeal to society for the relevance of truth in narrations and the need to preserve the legacies of those who struggled for justice. As a society, we must make sure that the genuine struggles of people like Shah Bano are remembered and respected and that their contributions to social and legal reforms are not distorted for the sake of entertainment.
Shah Bano's legacy is one of courage, conviction, and steadfast commitment to justice. It is a legacy that should be preserved in its true light for future generations.
. . .
References: