- ‘Absolute vesting’ of rights in bride remains unaffected by any subsequent separation or divorce: Justice Mansoor Ali Shah
ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has conferred exclusive and unqualified ownership rights all property given to a bride as dowry, gifts or presents regardless of any future divorce or separation.
SC’s Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah while issuing a seven-page judgment on a family matter, stated that using the phrase “shall vest absolutely” confers exclusive and unqualified proprietary rights upon the bride, thereby barring any adverse claim by the husband or his relatives.
“The subsequent part “and her interest in property, however derived, shall hereafter not be restrictive, conditional or limited” acts as a safeguard to protect the bride’s proprietary autonomy from customary or familial encumbrances,” the verdict read.
It noted that this absolute vesting of rights in the bride remains unaffected by any subsequent separation or divorce, reinforcing her enduring and independent entitlement to such property.
The division bench, led by Justice Shah, referred to the Dowry and Bridal Gifts (Restriction) Act, 1976, noting that the legislature draws a clear distinction between three categories of property exchanged in connection with a marriage: “dowry,” “bridal gifts,” and “presents”.
It pointed out that the dowry originates from the bride’s parents and is given to the bride, while bridal gifts are conferred by the groom or his parents upon the bride.
The verdict explained that presents comprise a residual category of gifts given to either party to the marriage, or their relatives, in connection with the wedding.
The judgment outlined that the legislative intent behind Section 5 of the Act is to ensure the independent proprietary status of the bride and protect her from dispossession, particularly in the event of a marital breakdown.
“A purposive interpretation of this provision necessarily confines the scope of recoverable property to that which is demonstrably intended for the bride.”
Accordingly, items gifted to the groom or his relatives, unless clearly shown to be intended for the bride’s use or held in trust for her benefit, fall outside the protective ambit of the Act.
The bench noted that a bride’s right to her belongings and property under Section 5 is reinforced by constitutional guarantees enshrined in Articles 23 and 24 of the Constitution, which recognise her right to hold and dispose of her property irrespective of her marital status.
It added that Article 25 guarantees equality before the law and equal protection under it, obligating the state to eliminate all forms of discrimination against women.
Additionally, Article 35 of the constitution obligates the state to protect the marriage, the family, the mother and the child. In construing Section 5, courts must therefore interpret the statutory language in harmony with these constitutional principles.
