The Supreme Court on Friday has issued a notice to Indian cricketer Mohammed Shami while questioning his estranged wife, Hasin Jahan, on her demand for an increased maintenance amount. The court reportedly asked Jahan, “If ₹4 lakh a month isn’t enough, then how much do you require?”
Case Insights
The petition claims that Mohammed Shami earns nearly ₹1 crore per month and has an estimated net worth of over ₹500 crore, yet provides only a “grossly inadequate and unjust” amount as maintenance. It further argues that the lower courts failed to consider the cricketer’s “enormous wealth, social standing, and standard of living.”
Labeling Shami as an “A-listed national cricketer,” Jahan points out that he continues to represent India in international tournaments and remains among the highest-paid athletes in the country. According to her filing, Shami declared an income of ₹47.99 crore in FY 2021–22, with monthly personal expenses exceeding ₹1.08 crore.
Jahan stated that she has been unemployed since marriage and relies entirely on maintenance for her and her daughter’s sustenance. She alleges that Shami’s refusal to provide fair support is a “deliberate attempt to humiliate and financially exhaust” them.
Allegations Of Asset
The petition also accuses the cricketer of structuring his assets strategically to evade his legal responsibilities while maintaining an extravagant lifestyle. It details his foreign travels, luxury cars, real estate investments, and large-scale charitable donations, claiming he “openly donates several crores for social causes” yet denies his family the same financial security.
The plea highlights that their child’s education and overall well-being have been affected, as she is allegedly studying in a “modest local school,” unlike children of similarly privileged families who receive premium education.
Domestic Violence Allegations
Jahan’s plea also revisits the domestic violence and cruelty allegations that led to the breakdown of the marriage. She cites FIR No. 82/2018, filed at Jadavpur Police Station under Sections 498A, 307, 376, and 325 of the IPC, as evidence of a continuing pattern of abuse now extended through “economic deprivation.”
The matter is now expected to be listed for further hearing in December, where the court will review income statements, living expenses, and lifestyle claims before delivering its decision.
