New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday said a 1986 law enacted to safeguard the rights of divorced Muslim women must keep at the forefront equality, dignity and autonomy, and consider lived experiences of women, as inherent patriarchal discrimination is still the order of the day, particularly in smaller towns and rural areas.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh made the observation while interpreting a legal question — whether goods given to a Muslim woman by her father at the time of her marriage, or to the bridegroom, can by the application of law be returned to her given that the marriage has ended in a divorce.
The top court set aside a Calcutta High Court order that had ruled in favour of the former husband of a woman and given him relief from returning some parts of the goods that the woman’s side had claimed were given to him at the time of their wedding, in a case filed under section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, seeking the return of a total amount of more than Rs 17.67 lakh.
The bench said the case presents the possibility of two interpretations and it is a settled rule that this court, under the plenary powers conferred on it by Article 136 of the Constitution, does not interfere with the findings of a high court simply because two views are possible.
It said the case does not fall under this exception as the high court missed the purposive construction goalpost and instead, proceeded to adjudicate the matter purely as a civil dispute.
“The Constitution of India prescribes an aspiration for all, that is, equality which is, obviously, yet to be achieved. Courts, in doing their bit to this end, must ground their reasoning in social justice adjudication.
“To put it in context, the scope and object of the 1986 Act is concerned with securing the dignity and financial protection of a Muslim woman post her divorce, which aligns with the rights of a woman under Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” it 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 top court added.
It allowed the woman’s appeal and set aside the high court’s orders.
The bench asked the woman’s counsel to give details of her bank account and other relevant information to her former husband’s lawyer within three working days from the date of the judgment.
“The amount be directly remitted into the bank account of the appellant (the wife). The respondent (her former husband) is directed to file an affidavit of compliance with the registry of this court within six weeks thereafter. The said compliance certificate shall be placed on record. If the needful is not done, the respondent would be liable to pay interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum,” the bench ordered.
The couple got married on August 28, 2005 but differences arose between them shortly thereafter and the woman left her matrimonial home in May 2009.
Subsequently, she filed an application under section 125 (order for maintenance of wives, children and parents) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and initiated proceedings under section 498A (husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty) of the Indian Penal Code.
The marriage eventually ended in a divorce on December 13, 2011 and the woman thereafter moved the court under section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, seeking the return of more than Rs 17.67 lakh.
