Another important decision of the Supreme Court has come out on women’s rights. The Supreme Court has said that women also have the right to succession among tribals. In a dispute related to succession, women of tribal families also have equal rights as men.
It is unfair and discriminatory to deprive women of succession. This is a violation of the right to equality of women, although the Hindu Succession Act does not apply to Scheduled Tribes, but this does not mean that tribal women are automatically denied succession. The bench said that it should be seen whether a prevailing practice exists, which prohibits the tribal rights of women’s share in ancestral property.
A violation of Article 15 of the Constitution to deprive the rights of succession
Justice Sanjay Karol, while writing the decision, said that in this case, the parties could not establish the existence of any practice that deprives women of succession. Even if there is any such practice, it has to be developed. Like the law, customs cannot be tied in time. Others cannot be allowed to take shelter of customs or deprive others of their rights by hiding behind them. Declaring the rights of succession on the basis of gender is a violation of Article 15 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law, only there is no justification for permission to succession to male heirs.
This only enhances gender division and discrimination- SC
The judgment also states that in the absence of a specific tribal custom or coded law prohibiting the rights of women, courts should use ‘justice, equality and good discretion’, otherwise refusing to give rights to the woman (or her) successor only enhances gender division and discrimination, which should remove the law.
It is unconstitutional to refuse to give a share in property based on gender- SC
A bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Joymalya Bagchi heard the case in which the appellant, being a legal heir of a Scheduled Tribe named Dhaiya, was seeking a share in the property of her maternal grandfather, although the male heirs of the family opposed the claim that women have been kept out of the succession under the tribal customs, but these dalils have been kept out of the succession, but these dalils have been written by these dalils, but these dalils have been written by these dalils, but these dalils have been written by these dalils, but these dalils have been written by these dalils, but these dalils have been written by these dalils, but these dalils have been written by these dalils. It was emphasized that equality should be maintained due to lack of any prohibitory practice. It is unconstitutional to refuse a tribal woman or her heirs to give a share in property only on the basis of gender. In addition, it was found that the lower court made a mistake by telling the opponents to prove the practice of inheritance by women instead of proving the practice of succession.
Of course this practice should be silent, but violation of right to equality- SC
To refuse to give Dhaiya (tribal woman) a share in her father’s property, when this practice is silent, her own brothers or her legal heirs would violate the right to equality with their cousins. The court said that it seems that there is no rational relationship or proper classification to men only to be successful on the property of their ancestors and not giving women. Especially in the case where any such prohibition cannot be shown as per law. Article 15 (1) states that the state will not discriminate against any person on the basis of religion, origin, caste, gender or place of birth. This indicates the collective ethos of the Constitution, which ensures that there is no discrimination against women. The court accepted the appeal and provided equal share in the property, being Dhaiya’s legal successor.