SC Rules All Marriage Gifts Must Be Returned to Muslim Women After Divorce

Key Points

In a major judgment on December 2, 2025, the Supreme Court strengthened the financial and constitutional rights of divorced Muslim women. The Court ruled that all gifts—cash, gold, property, and other items—given at the time of marriage must be returned to the woman after divorce. This applies even if the items were handed to the husband.

The decision came in the case of Rousanara Begum, who had been fighting a long legal battle to recover her property worth ₹17,67,980, including money and 30 bhori of gold that her parents had given during her marriage in 2005. After she separated from her husband in 2009 and the divorce was finalised in 2011, she sought the return of these items under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. Both the trial court and the sessions court agreed that she was entitled to the money and gold, based on entries in the marriage register and the testimony of the marriage registrar (Kazi).

See Also: How Nehru Played an Important Role in India’s Independence Struggle, Institution-Building, and National Development

The case went through multiple rounds in the lower courts. The Calcutta High Court later set aside these findings, relying mainly on a statement made by the woman’s father years earlier in separate proceedings under Section 498A of the IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. In that case—where the husband was eventually acquitted—the father had said that he had given the money and gold to the groom. The High Court treated this as strong evidence and rejected the woman’s claim.

Supreme Court Rejects High Court View on Rousanara Begum Case

The Supreme Court strongly disagreed with this approach. A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N. Kotiswar Singh held that the High Court had ignored the real purpose of the 1986 Act, which is to ensure the dignity, safety, and financial protection of divorced Muslim women. “The construction of this Act must keep at the forefront equality, dignity and autonomy and must consider the lived experiences of women—especially in smaller towns and rural areas—where patriarchal discrimination is still common,” the bench said.

The judges said that the marriage registrar’s testimony, along with documentary proof of overwriting in the marriage register, could not be dismissed simply because of the father’s statement made in a different case. Since that criminal case had ended in acquittal, the father’s statement could not be given more weight than the direct evidence provided by the Kazi, who had produced the actual marriage records.

See Also: Congress’ Nehru Focus Under Fire As BJP Highlights Ambedkar Marginalisation

The Supreme Court noted that the High Court had “missed the purposive construction goalpost” by treating the matter like a simple civil dispute instead of recognising that the 1986 Act is meant to protect divorced women from financial hardship. The bench made it clear that Section 3 of the Act gives a divorced Muslim woman the right to recover all property given to her before, during, or after marriage—whether the gifts came from her parents, relatives, the husband, or the husband’s family. The Court stressed that gifts intended for the woman do not become the husband’s property just because they were handed to him during the wedding.

Allowing Rousanara Begum’s appeal, the Supreme Court restored her right to recover the money and 30 bhori of gold. It directed her former husband to transfer the amount directly to her bank account within three working days and file a compliance affidavit within six weeks. If he fails to do so, the amount will carry an interest of 9% per year.

This judgment not only brings relief to Rousanara but also sets an important precedent to strengthen the financial rights and dignity of divorced Muslim women across India.

[Rh]

Suggested Reading: