The Supreme Court on Thursday (Dec 19) emphasized the need for parity in inheritance rights between male and female members of scheduled tribe (ST) communities. A Bench of Justice CT Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Karol held that denying equal rights to women from ST communities is unjustifiable, particularly in light of the Constitution of India’s guarantee of the right to equality. The Court also highlighted that when a daughter from a non-tribal community is entitled to such a right, there is no reason to deny the right to daughter belonging to ST community.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India on Thursday, stressed the importance of granting equal inheritance rights to women in Scheduled Tribe (ST) communities, just like their male counterparts.
The Court pointed out that this disparity is unfair and violates the Constitution of India’s guarantee of equality.
A bench of Justice CT Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Karol emphasized-
“Female tribal is entitled to parity with male tribal in intestate succession. To deny the equal right to the daughter belonging to the tribal even after a period of 70 years of the Constitution of India under which right to equality is guaranteed, it is high time for the Central government to look into the matter and if required, to amend the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act by which the Hindu Succession Act is not made applicable to the members of the Scheduled Tribe.”
The Court highlighted that daughters from non-tribal communities already enjoy equal inheritance rights under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and questioned why the same rights should not be extended to daughters in tribal communities. It urged the Central Government to reconsider the current provisions of the Act, which exclude its application to ST communities.
Currently, Section 2(2) of the Hindu Succession Act states that the Act will not apply to Scheduled Tribes unless specifically notified by the Central government.
The Court called upon the government to address this issue and amend the law to ensure equal inheritance rights for women in tribal communities.
The Supreme Court was hearing an appeal against a decision by the Chhattisgarh High Court. The case revolved around property rights of a woman belonging to the Sawara Tribe, a recognized Scheduled Tribe under Article 342 of the Constitution.
The appellants argued that since the respondent’s father, Mardan, had died in 1951—before the Hindu Succession Act came into force in 1956—his daughters could not claim any rights over his property. Both the civil court and the first appellate court supported the appellants, reasoning that Mardan’s death predated the Act, and that the family followed the Hindu religion.
As a result, it was initially held that the daughters had no legal rights to the property.
However, the Chhattisgarh High Court took a different view. It invoked principles of justice, equity, and good conscience to extend inheritance rights to Mardan’s daughters, despite the Hindu Succession Act not being applicable to Scheduled Tribes. The High Court’s decision was challenged in the Supreme Court by the appellants.
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision. It relied on the Central Provinces Laws Act, 1875, which permits the application of justice and fairness principles in cases where tribal succession laws are unclear.
Referring to past rulings, the Court noted that it could use equitable principles to ensure fairness, especially for women. Quoting its 1996 decision in Madhu Kishwar and Others v. State of Bihar, the Court said:
“The provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and the Indian Succession Act, 1925 though in terms, would not apply to the Scheduled Tribes, the general principles contained therein being consistent with justice, equity, fairness, justness and good conscience would apply to them. Accordingly, I hold that the Scheduled Tribe women would succeed to the estate of their parent, brother, husband, as heirs by intestate succession and inherit the property with equal share with the male heir with absolute rights as per the general principles of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as amended and interpreted by this Court and equally of the Indian Succession Act to tribal Christians.”
The Court also referred to its 2022 decision in Kamla Neti v. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, where it reiterated the need for gender parity in tribal inheritance laws.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal by the appellants and strongly urged the Central Government to amend the Hindu Succession Act to ensure that women in tribal communities receive equal inheritance rights.
CASE TITLE:
Tirith Kumar and Others v. Daduram and Others.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Hindu Succession Act
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
