The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled
that a divorced Muslim woman has the right to recover from her former husband
the cash, gold and other gifts given by her parents at the time of wedding. The
court said this right is clearly protected under the Muslim Women (Protection
of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986.
A
Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh delivered the judgment
while overturning a Calcutta High Court order that had denied the woman these
assets.
The
apex court observed that the Calcutta High Court looked at the dispute only as
a civil matter and ignored the broader objective of the 1986 Act, which is
meant to protect the dignity and financial security of divorced Muslim women.
Highlighting
the law’s purpose, the court said that interpretations must reflect the lived
realities of women, especially in rural and small-town India where patriarchal
norms still prevail, the news report said.
"...The
construction of this Act, therefore, must keep at the forefront equality,
dignity and autonomy and must be done in the light of lived experiences of
women where particularly in smaller towns and rural areas, inherent patriarchal
discrimination is still the order of the day," the court said.
The case involved a
couple married in 2005. The woman left the matrimonial home on May 7, 2009, due
to marital disputes. Soon after, she filed a maintenance case under Section 125
of the Criminal Procedure Code and a criminal complaint alleging cruelty under
Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The marriage formally ended on December
13, 2011.
After the divorce, the
woman filed a claim under Section 3 of the 1986 Act. She sought the return of
cash, 30 bhories of gold, furniture and household items given by her father at the
time of wedding. She estimated the total value at around ?17.67 lakh, Bar
and Bench reported.
A trial court initially
awarded her ?8.3 lakh. On remand, an Additional Judicial Magistrate ruled that
she was entitled to ?8 lakh and 30 bhories of gold. The magistrate also noted
that ?1 lakh of mehr had already been paid, which meant the husband had to
return ?7 lakh and the gold.
The
man challenged this before the Calcutta High Court. The high court rejected the
woman’s claim, citing a discrepancy in the marriage register -- one entry
showed the gifts were given to the husband, while the other did not specify the
recipient.
The
high court also relied on a statement by the woman’s father in the Section 498A
case, where he said he had given the gifts to his son-in-law.
The top court disagreed
with the high court’s approach. It pointed out that the father’s statement was
made in a criminal case where the husband was later acquitted. The court
questioned how such a statement could be treated as more reliable than the
marriage registrar’s record, the news report said.
The
registrar had stated that the gifts were recorded without mentioning who
received them.
The
Supreme Court restored the magistrate’s order. The woman is now entitled to
recover ?7 lakh and 30 bhories of gold from her former husband.