In a brief but tense hearing this week, the Supreme Court set aside a Calcutta High Court order and ruled that a divorced Muslim woman is legally entitled to reclaim money and gold given at the time of her marriage, even if those items were originally handed to the groom’s side. The bench, led by Justice Sanjay Karol, stressed that courts must keep “dignity and equality at the forefront” while interpreting the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. The decision came in the appeal filed by Rousanara Begum, who has been fighting this battle for over a decade.
Background
The dispute goes back to a 2005 marriage that quickly soured. According to case records, Rousanara left her matrimonial home in 2009 and later filed maintenance and cruelty complaints. The marriage ended in 2011. Soon after, she approached the court seeking the return of ₹17.6 lakh worth of items, including 30 bhori of gold, furniture, and dower (mehr).
The trial court initially granted her around ₹8 lakh plus the gold. But what followed was a maze of revisions, remands, and conflicting interpretations by various courts. At the centre of the disagreement were two marriage register entries-one stating that Rousanara’s father gave ₹7 lakh and 30 bhori of gold to the groom, and another showing the same amount given without specifying who received it.
The High Court ultimately accepted the version that the gifts were meant for the groom, not the bride, and thus refused her claim. That ruling pushed the matter to the Supreme Court.
Court’s Observations
During the hearing, the Supreme Court bench questioned why the High Court had relied solely on the father’s earlier statement-one made during a dowry-harassment case that had ended in the husband’s acquittal. The bench noted that the marriage registrar himself admitted that the entry mentioning the groom as recipient was an error, and the document showed overwriting.
Read also: Supreme Court Restores Seniority Rights of PSEB Employee After Nearly Five-Decade Legal Battle
Justice Karol remarked, “When the Registrar has produced the original document and explained the mistake, why should his testimony be doubted merely because there is overwriting?”
The bench also pointed out that the purpose of the 1986 Act is not to split hairs over civil documentation but to safeguard a divorced woman’s financial rights.
In a strong passage, the Court said many women, especially in smaller towns, still face subtle and open patriarchal pressures. “The construction of this Act must keep equality, dignity, and autonomy in mind,” the bench observed, adding that courts cannot ignore the lived experiences of women who often lose their security after divorce.
The judges also reminded that Section 3 of the Act clearly entitles a divorced woman to all properties given to her at or before marriage, regardless of family customs.
Read also: Supreme Court Flags Serious Procedural Flaws, Sends Bihar Murder Case Back for Fresh Section 313
Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and restored Rousanara Begum’s right to receive the ₹7 lakh and 30 bhori of gold. It directed the husband to transfer the amount directly to her bank account within the prescribed time and file an affidavit of compliance within six weeks. Failure to do so will attract 9% annual interest.
With that, the Court concluded the matter, overturning the High Court ruling and reaffirming that marital gifts meant for a woman cannot be withheld after divorce.
Case Title: Rousanara Begum vs. S.K. Salahuddin & Anr.
Case No.: Criminal Appeal (arising out of SLP (Crl.) Diary No. 60854 of 2024)
Case Type: Criminal Appeal – Claim for return of marital gifts under Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986
Decision Date: 2 December 2025
