### Landmark Supreme Court Judgment Affirms Equal Inheritance Rights for Daughters in Hindu Families

In a historic ruling, the Supreme Court of India has affirmed that daughters have equal rights to inheritance as sons, marking a significant step towards gender equality in Hindu succession laws. The judgment in Vineeta Sharma v Rakesh Sharma clarifies the application of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, ensuring daughters are recognized as coparceners by birth, irrespective of their father’s living status at the time of the amendment. This article delves into the implications of the judgment, the legal principles involved, and its potential impact on gender equality and property rights within Hindu families.

Supreme Court Affirms Daughters’ Equal Rights to Inheritance in Landmark Judgment

In a historic verdict on August 11, the Supreme Court of India reinforced the rights of daughters to equal inheritance, clarifying the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act (HSA), 1956, as amended in 2005. The bench, comprising Justices Arun Mishra, S. Abdul Nazeer, and M.R. Shah, in the case of Vineeta Sharma v Rakesh Sharma, unequivocally stated that daughters, like sons, are coparceners by birth, irrespective of whether their father was alive at the time of the 2005 amendment.

To delve deeper into the implications of this judgment, The Wire spoke with Dr. Saumya Uma, an Associate Professor at Jindal Global Law School. Dr. Uma, an expert in family law and feminism, shed light on the transformative potential of this ruling and its capacity to end years of legal ambiguity surrounding Section 6 of the HSA.

Dr. Uma explained that prior to this judgment, there was significant uncertainty due to conflicting interpretations of the law by the Supreme Court itself. The 2016 Prakash v Phulavati ruling and the 2018 Danamma v Amar judgment offered divergent views on whether the amendment applied to daughters whose fathers had passed away before 2005. The recent judgment resolves this by affirming that the amendment is applicable regardless of the father’s survival on the amendment date, thereby granting daughters equal rights by birth.

The legal principle at the heart of this decision is the concept of unobstructed heritage (apratibandha daya) in Mitakshara law, which recognizes rights by birth. Dr. Uma highlighted that the 2005 amendment was a significant step towards gender equality, aiming to dismantle the patriarchal structure of inheritance within Hindu families.

Discussing the broader implications, Dr. Uma noted that the judgment would have a profound impact on state amendments that previously offered limited rights to daughters. Furthermore, she differentiated between retrospective and retroactive amendments, clarifying that the 2005 amendment is retroactive as it applies based on the status acquired by birth, despite being enacted later.

However, Dr. Uma also pointed out the inherent gender stereotypes in equating daughters’ rights with those of sons, suggesting that true equality requires recognizing and accommodating differences rather than enforcing uniformity. She emphasized the practical challenges in implementing this judgment, including social stigma and familial pressure, which often discourage women from asserting their rights.

Empirical studies cited by Dr. Uma indicate positive outcomes from similar reforms in the past, such as increased educational and economic opportunities for women. Yet, she stressed the need for comprehensive strategies to address the deep-rooted social and cultural barriers that prevent effective implementation of such laws.

Reflecting on the judgment’s place within the broader jurisprudence on gender equality, Dr. Uma expressed hope that this decision marks a step towards dismantling the remaining gender-biased provisions in the HSA. She called for continued legal reform to align the HSA with constitutional principles of equality.

This landmark judgment not only clarifies the law but also reaffirms the Supreme Court’s commitment to gender justice, potentially paving the way for further advancements in women’s rights in India.