New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India recently said that a man has no control over his wife’s ‘streedhan’ (woman’s property). The apex added that the husband however may use it during the time of his distress. However, he has a moral obligation to return it to his wife.
The Supreme Court has said this while directing the husband to pay Rs 25 lakh to the woman in return for her lost gold. The case was initiated in a family Court and later it was appealed in the Kerala High Court. Not satisfied over the verdict of the High Court the woman then moved to the Supreme Court.
In this case, the woman claimed that 89 sovereigns of gold were gifted to her by her family at the time of marriage. Besides, post marriage, her father had given a cheque for Rs 2 lakh to her husband.
According to the woman, the husband took custody of all her jewellery on the first day of their marriage. Not only this but he entrusted it to his mother for ‘safekeeping’.
She alleged that all the jewellery was later misappropriated by the husband and his mother to discharge their pre-existing financial liabilities.
In 2011 the Family Court found the allegation of the woman true. The court held that the husband and his mother had indeed misappropriated the woman’s gold jewellery and hence she was entitled to get the amount of money equivalent to the loss incurred due to the misappropriation.
However, later, the Kerala High Court held that the woman could not able to establish misappropriation of gold jewellery by the husband and his mother.
The woman then moved the Supreme Court against the high court order.
In this case a Supreme Court bench of justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta said:
“Properties gifted to a woman before marriage, at the time of marriage or at the time of bidding farewell or thereafter are her streedhan properties. It is her absolute property with all rights to dispose at her own pleasure.
“The husband has no control over her streedhan property. He may use it during the time of his distress but nonetheless he has a moral obligation to restore the same or its value to his wife.”
Ms Kalinga