Court Declares Customary Law Limiting Widow's Rights to Non-Ancestral Property as Discriminatory and Unconstitutional
In a landmark judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has decisively ruled against the customary law that restricted a widow's right to alienate non-ancestral property inherited from her husband. Justice Virinder Aggarwal declared such customary restrictions as discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.
The case, Mohd. Ashraf v. Sadiq, revolved around the alienation of property by a widow, Smt. Rehmani, who had inherited non-ancestral land from her deceased husband, Akkal. The property was sold via a registered sale-deed in 1982 to the appellants, Mohd. Ashraf and another, without the consent of Akkal’s collateral relatives. The respondent, claiming to be a collateral relative, contested the sale citing customary law, which purportedly required such consent for valid alienation.
Justice Aggarwal, in his judgment, emphasized that any restriction limiting a widow's right to deal with non-ancestral property independently is legally impermissible unless grounded in clear legal necessity. The judgment underscored the discriminatory nature of customary laws that marginalize female property rights, stressing the constitutional mandate for gender equality.
The appellants argued that the property was sold due to genuine legal necessity, including maintenance expenses and marriage costs of a granddaughter. The High Court found the sale valid, emphasizing that the widow's right to alienate non-ancestral property should not be curtailed by customary laws unless it pertained to ancestral property, where different rules may apply.
Justice Aggarwal referred to several Supreme Court judgments, including Jai Kaur v. Sher Singh, which elucidated the distinction between ancestral and non-ancestral property in customary law contexts. The ruling aligns with progressive judicial interpretations that advocate for gender equality and reject discriminatory practices against women.
The Court's decision sets a significant precedent, reinforcing the constitutional rights of women and challenging outdated customary laws. It reiterates the principle that property rights of women must be upheld without arbitrary restrictions based on gender, thereby promoting social justice and equality.
Bottom Line:
The restriction on the right of a widow to alienate non-ancestral property inherited from her husband, solely on the basis of customary law, is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Such restrictions are legally impermissible unless grounded in clear legal necessity or consent of collaterals, as applicable to ancestral property.
Statutory provision(s): Article 14 of the Constitution of India
Mohd. Ashraf v. Sadiq (Since Deceased), (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc id # 2843007
