Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 – s.3 – Mahr or other properties of Muslim woman to be given to her at the time of divorce – Goods given to a daughter at the time of her marriage by her father, or to the bridegroom, if by application of law, can be returned to the daughter-appellant given that their marriage had ended in divorce: Held: s.3 deals with mehr/dower and/or other properties given to a woman at the time of her marriage clearing the way for the woman to set up a claim against her husband, or claim back from her husband properties given, as the case may be – Scope and object of 1986 Act is to secure dignity and financial protection of a Muslim women post her divorce which aligns with the rights of a women u/Art.21 – Construction of 1986 Act, thus, must keep at the forefront equality, dignity and autonomy and must be done where inherent patriarchal discrimination is still the order of the day – On facts, the primary basis for High Court not giving the amount and gold in question to the appellant-divorced muslim wife, was the apparent contradiction between the statement of the Kazi-marriage Registrar and the father of the appellant – High Court recorded that the latter statement regarding writing and overwriting in the entry in the marriage register is proved by him having produced the same before the Court – Mere allegation as to his conduct being suspicious on account of overwriting in the marriage register not sufficient to discard his testimony – This Court under its plenary, Art.136 jurisdiction does not interfere with the findings of the High Court simply because there are two views possible, this case, does not fall under this exception for the High Court missed the purposive construction goalpost and instead proceeded to adjudicate the matter purely as a civil dispute – Constitution of India prescribes an aspiration for all, equality which is, obviously, yet to be achieved – Courts, in doing their bit to this end must ground their reasoning in social justice adjudication – Thus, the judgment and order passed by the High Court set aside – Respondent to remit the amount directly into the bank account of the appellant. [Paras 8-10]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.