Married woman has absolute right over her 'Stridhan', rules CG HC

Raipur: A married woman has absolute right over ‘Stridhan', even if it is in the custody of her husband and in-laws, Chhattisgarh high court has said.

HC ordered the husband to return 28 tolas (around 326.5 gram) of gold to his wife, 53, and pay a fine of Rs 10,000 within two months. Failure to comply with the order will lead to three months' imprisonment.

The bench of Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas noted that 26 years have passed since the original complaint was filed on Sept 17, 1998. The couple are aged 56 and 53 now.

Considering the possibility that both parties may have remarried and settled in their respective lives, the court deemed a jail sentence to be of no practical purpose. Section 406 IPC stipulates a maximum sentence of three years or a fine, or both, but does not prescribe a minimum sentence, the court observed.

The case involves a Raipur woman, who was married to a Bhilai resident on Nov 3, 1995. She lived in her matrimonial home but alleged that her husband and other in-laws subjected her to harassment and cruelty, leaving her no option but to leave the house at midnight on March 19, 1996. In her distressed state, she was compelled to leave behind her ‘Stridhan', including jewellery, gold, silver, and other valuables.

She filed a complaint against her husband at Raipur Mahila Thana, citing offences under IP section 498-A and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Police registered a case.

The investigation was on when her husband sent a legal notice to her on Dec 7, 1997. The wife, too, sent a notice to him on May 30, 1998, demanding the return of her ‘Stridhan', a list of which she submitted at Mahila Thana. The wife eventually filed a complaint under Section 200 CrPC in court.

After hearing both parties, the Raipur judicial magistrate acquitted the husband on 10 May, 2023 , which led the wife to approach high court.

In the appeal, her counsel argued that ‘Stridhan' remains the property of the wife, and an offence of criminal breach of trust continues as long as it is not returned. Her counsel asserted that the trial court had overlooked a 2003 judgment by the Secunderabad family court, which established the wife's entrustment of the articles to her husband.

HC, after hearing all parties, observed in its order, "It is quite clear that the gold ornaments were worn by the appellant at the time of marriage, and the receipts were also produced before the trial court. The appellant left her matrimonial home on March 19, 1996, under dire circumstances at midnight. Therefore, it was impossible for her to carry gold and silver ornaments in such a terrifying situation."

These circumstances prove that the gold remained with the husband, HC noted. It overturned the husband's acquittal and found him guilty under Section 405 IPC.