http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 21  

PETITIONER: MADHU KISHWAR & ORS. ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       17/04/1996

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. KULDIP SINGH (J) PUNCHHI, M.M.

CITATION:  1996 AIR 1864            1996 SCC  (5) 125  JT 1996 (4)   379        1996 SCALE  (3)640

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                             WITH              Write  Petition (C) No.219 of 1986                       J U D G M E N T K. RAMASWAMY, J.      These two  writ petitions raise common question of law: whether female tribal is entitled to parity with male tribal in intestate  succession? The  first petitioner is an Editor of a  Magazine ’Manushi’  espousing the causes to ameliorate the social  and economic backwardness of Indian women and to secure them equal rights. Petitioner Nos.2 Smt. Sonamuni and 3 Smt.  Muki Dui are respectively widow and married daughter of Muki  Banguma, Ho  tribe of  Longo village,  Sonua Block, Singhbhum District  in Bihar  State. The  petitioner in Writ Petition No.219/86,  Juliana Lakra  is   an Oraon  Christian tribal woman from Chhota Nagpur  area. They seek declaration that Sections 7, 8 and 76  of the Chhota Nagpur Tenancy Act, 6 of  1908, (for  short, the ’Act’) are ultra vires Articles 14, 15  and   21 of  the Constitution of India. They contend that the   customary  law operating  in the  Bihar State and other   parts of  the country  excluding tribal  women  from inheritance  of   land  or  property  belonging  to  father, husband, mother  and conferment  of right to inheritance  to the male  heirs or  lineal descendants being founded  solely on sex  is discriminatory. The tribal women toil, share with men equally  the daily  sweat, troubles  and tribulations in agricultural  operations   and  family    management.  Their discrimination based on the customary  law of inheritance is unconstitutional,  unjust,   unfair     and  illegal.   Even usufructuary rights  conferred on  a widow  or an  unmarried daughter become  illusory due  to  diverse pressures brought to bear  brunt at the behest  of lineal descendants or their extermination. Even   married  or  unmarried  daughters  are excluded from  inheritance,  when  they  were  subjected  to adultery by   non-tribals;  they are denuded of the right to

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 21  

enjoy the   property  of her  father or deceased husband for life. The  widow on  remarriage is denied inherited property of her  former husband.  They have  elaborated by  narrating several incidents  in which  the women either were forced to give up  their life  interest or  became target  of  violent attacks or  murdered. Petitioner  Nos.2 and  3 in  the first writ petition  sought police  protection for their lives and interim directions were given.      When this court has taken up the matter for hearing, in the light of the stand of the respondents taken at that time to suitably amend the Act, by order dated December 16, 1986, the  case  was  adjourned  with  the  hope  that  the  State Government would suitably amend Sections 7 and 8 of the Act. By further  order dated  August 6,  1991, this  court  after being apprised  of the  State  Government    constituting  a Committee to  examine the  desirability  to  amend  the  Act giving  equal   rights  of  inheritance  to  women,  further adjourned the  hearing awaiting the report of the Committee. The State-level  Tribal Advisory  Board  consisting  of  the Chief   Minister,   Cabinet   Ministers,   legislators   and parliamentarians representing  the tribal areas, met on July 23, 1988 and decided as under:      "The tribal society is dominated by      males. This,  however does not mean      that   the   female   members   are      neglected  A  female  member  in  a      tribal family has right of usufruct      in the  property owned  by same  is      the property  of her  husband after      the marriage  . However,  she  does      not have  any right to transfer her      share to   any  body by  any  means      whatsoever. A widow will have right      to  usufruct   of   the   husband’s      property  till  such  time  she  is      issueless and,  in the event of her      death the property will revert back      to the  legal  heirs  of  her  late      husband. In  case of a widow having      offspring the  children succeed the      property  of  the  father  and  the      mother will  be a care taker of the      property till  the children  attain      majority .  The Sub-Committee  also      felt that  every tribal  does  have      some land  and in case the right of      inheritance   in    the   ancestral      property is  granted  to the female      descendants, this  will enlarge the      threat of alienation of the  tribal      land in  the hands  or non tribals.      The female    members  being  given      right of  transfer of  their rights      in the origin of  malpractices like      dowry and  the  like  prevalent  in      other  non-tribal societies."      When the matter was taken up for final disposal and the resolution of  the Board  was brought  to the notice of this Court by  order dated  October 11,  1991 this  court further expressed thus:      "Scheduled tribe people are as much      citizens as  others  and  they  are      entitled   to    the   benefit   of      guarantees of  the Constitution. It      may be  that the  law  can  provide

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 21  

    reasonable regulation in the matter      of succession  to property  with  a      view to   maintaining  cohesiveness      in regard  to Scheduled  Tribes and      their  properties.   But  exclusion      from  inheritance   would  not   be      appropriate. Since  this aspect  of      the matter has not been examined by      the  State   of   Bihar   and   the      feasibility      of      permitting      inheritance   and    simultaneously      regulating such inheritance for the      purpose  of   ensuring   that   the      property does  not go  out  of  the      family  by   way  of   transfer  or      otherwise we  are of  the view that      in the  peculiar facts  of the case      the  State   of  Bihar  should  re-      examine the matter."      The State  Government reiterated  its earlier stand, as stated in  an affidavit filed in this behalf. Sections 6, 7, 8 and 76 of the Act are as follows :      "6.  Meaning   of  raiyat.   -  (1)      "Raiyat" means  primarily a  person      who has  acquired a  right to  hold      land for the purpose of cultivating      it by himself, or by members of his      family, or  by hired  servants,  or      with  the   aid  of  partners;  and      includes the successors-in-interest      of persons who have acquired such a      right,  but   does  not  include  a      Nundari khunt-kattidar.      Explanation.-  Where  a  tenant  of      land has  the  right  to  bring  it      under  cultivation,   he  shall  be      deemed to  have acquired a right to      hold  it   for   the   purpose   of      cultivation,  notwithstanding  that      he  uses  it  for  the  purpose  of      gathering the  produce of  it or of      grazing cattle on it.      (2) A person shall not be deemed to      be a  raiyat   unless he holds land      either    immediately    under    a      proprietor or  immediately under  a      tenure-holder or  immediately under      a Mundari khunt-kattidar.      (3) In determining whether a tenant      is a tenure-holder or a raiyat, the      court shall have regard to -      (a) local customs, and      (b) the purpose for which the right      of tenancy was originally acquired.      7. (1)  Meaning of  ’raiyat  having      khunt-khatti   rights’.-    "Raiyat      having &  kunt katti rights"  means      a  raiyat   in  occupation  of,  or      having  any  subsisting  title  to,      land reclaimed  from jungle  by the      original founders of the village or      their descendants in the male line,      when such raiyat is a member of the      family which founded the village or      a descendant  in the  male line  of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 21  

    any member of such family:           Provided that  no raiyat shall      be deemed to have kunt katti rights      in any  land unless  he and all his      predecessors-in-title   have   held      such  land   or  obtained  a  title      thereto by  virtue  of  inheritance      from the  original founders  of the      village.      (2)  Nothing   in  this  Act  shall      prejudicially affect  the rights of      any   person   who   has   lawfully      acquired  a   title  to  a    khunt      kattidari   tenancy    before   the      commencement of this Act.      8.  Meaning   of   Mundari   khunt-      kattidar.- "Mundari  khunt-kattidar      means a  Mundari who has acquired a      right to  hold jungle  land for the      purpose   of    bringing   suitable      portions thereof  under cultivation      by himself  or by  male members  of      his family, and includes-      (a) the  heirs male  in the line of      any such  Mundari, when they are in      possession of such land or have any      subsisting title thereto; and      (b) as regards any portions of such      land    which     have     remained      continuously in  the possession  of      any   such    Mundari    and    his      descendants in  the male line, such      descendants.      76. Saving  of custom.-  Nothing in      this Act  shall affect  any custom,      usage  or   customary   right   not      inconsistent with, or not expressly      or   by    necessary    implication      modified  or   abolished  by,   its      provisions."      In Ramalaxmi  Ammal  v.  Shivanadha  Perumal  Sheroyar, [(1872) 14 Moors Indian Appeals 585]. the judicial Committee had held  that  custom  is  the  essence  of  special  usage modifying the  ordinary law  of succession that it should be ancient and  invariable; and  it is  further essential  that they should be established to be so by clear and unambiguous evidence. It  is only  by means  of such  evidence that  the courts can  be assured  of their  existence  and  that  they possess the  conditions of  antiquity and certainty on which alone the  legal title  to  recognition  depends.  In  Abdul Hussain Khan  v. Bibi  Sona Dero..  [(1917-1918)  45  Indian Appeals 10],  when it  was pleaded  that by  customs of  the family, the  sister of  an intestate Mohammedan was excluded from inheritance  in favour  of a male paternal collaterals, by operation  of Section  26 of  the Bombay Regulation IV of 1827 (a  usage was  in question in the suit), the Board held that the custom was not established to exclude the sister of the deceased from inheritance.      By operation  of Article  13(3)(a) of  the Constitution law includes  custom or  usage  having  the  force  of  law. Article 13(1)  declares that  the preconstitutional laws, so far as  they are  inconsistent with  the fundamental  rights shall, to  the extent  of such  inconsistency, be  void. The object,  thereby,   is  to   secure   paramountcy   to   the Constitution and give primacy to fundamental rights. Article

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 21  

14  ensures   equality  of   law  and   prohibits  invidious discrimination. Arbitrariness  or  arbitrary  exclusion  are sworn enemies  to equality.  Article 15(1)  prohibits gender discrimination. Article  15(3) lifts  that rigor and permits the State  to positively  discriminate in favour of women to make special provision, to ameliorate their social, economic and political  justice and  accords them  parity. Article 38 enjoins the  State to  promote the  welfare  of  the  people (obviously men  and women alike) by securing social order in which justice,  - social,  economic and  political  -  shall inform of  all the  institutions of  national life.  Article 39(a) and  (b) enjoin  that the  State policy  should be  to secure that  men and  women equally  have the  right  to  an adequate means  of livelihood  and the ownership and control of  the   material  resources   of  the   community  are  so distributed as  best to  subserve the  common good.  Article 38(2) enjoins  the State  to minimize  the  inequalities  in income and  to endeavor to eliminate inequalities in status, facilities and  opportunities not only among individuals but also amongst  groups of  people. Article  46 accords special protection and  enjoins the  State to  promote with  special care the economic and educational interests of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and other weaker sections and to protect  them   from  social  injustice  and  all  forms  of exploitation. The  Preamble to the Constitution charters out the ship  of  the  State  to  secure  social,  economic  and political justice  and equality of opportunity and of status and dignity of person to every one.      The General  Assembly of  the United  Nations adopted a Declaration  on   December  4,   1986  on   "The  Right   to Development" to  which India played a crusading role for its adoption and ratified the same. Its preamble cognisises that all human  rights and  fundamental freedoms  are indivisible and interdependent.  All Nation  States are concerned at the existence of  serious obstacles  to development and complete fulfillment of  human beings,  denial  of  civil  political, economic, social  and cultural  rights. In  order to promote development  equal   attention  should   be  given   to  the implementation, promotion and protection of civil political, economic, social and political rights.      Article  1(1)   assures   right   to   development   an inalienable human  right by virtue of which every person and all people  are entitled  to participate  in, contribute to, and  enjoy   economic,  social,   cultural   and   political development  in  which  all  human  rights  and  fundamental freedoms can  be fully  realized. Article 6(1) obligates the State to  observe all  human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without any discrimination as to race, sex, language or religion.      Sub-article (2) enjoins that .......equal attention and urgent consideration should be given to the  implementation. promotion and  protection  of  civil,  political,  economic, social and political rights. Sub-article (3) thereof enjoins that "State  should take  steps  to  eliminate  obstacle  to development resulting  from failure  to  observe  civil  and political rights  as well  as economic,  social and cultural and cultural  right.  Article 8  castes duty on the State to undertake,........   all    necessary   measures   for   the realization of  right to development and ensure, inter alia, equality of  opportunity for  all in  their access  to basic resources.............  and  fair  distribution  of  income. Effective measures should be undertaken to ensure that women have an  active role in the development process. Appropriate economic and  social reforms  should be  carried out  with a view to eradicate all social injustice.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 21  

    Human Right,  are derived  from the  dignity and  worth inherent in  the human  person. Human Rights and fundamental freedom have been reiterated by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  Democracy, development  and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms are inter-dependent and have mutual reinforcement.  The human rights for soman, including girl  child   are,  therefore,   inalienable,  integral  and indivisible  part   of  universal  human  rights.  The  full development of  personality  and  fundamental  freedoms  and equal participation  by women in political, social, economic and cultural life are concomitants for national developments social and family stability and growth, culturally, socially and economically.  All forms of discrimination on grounds of gender  is  violative  of  fundamental  freedoms  and  human rights. Vienna Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination  Against   Women  (for   short  "CEDAW")  was ratified by  the U.N.O. on December 18, 1979. The Government of India  who was an active participant to CEDAW ratified it on June 19, 1993 and acceded to CEDAW on August 8, 1993 with reservation on  Articles 5(e),  16(1), 16(2) and 29 thereof. The Preamble of CEDAW reiterates that discrimination against women, violates  the principles  of equality  of rights  and respect  for   human  dignity;   is  an   obstacle  to   the participation on  equal terms  with men  in  the  political, social, economic and cultural life of their country; hampers the growth  of the  personality from  society and family and makes  it   more  difficult  for  the  full  development  of potentialities of  women in  the service  of their countries and  of   humanity.  Poverty   of  women   is  a   handicap. Establishment of  new international  economic order based on equality and  justice will  contribute significantly towards the promotion of equality between men and women etc. Article 1  defines   discrimination  against   women  to  mean  "any distinction, exclusion  or restriction  made on the basis of sex  which  has  the  effect  or  purpose  on  impairing  or nullifying the  recognized enjoyment  or exercise  by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men  and women, all human rights and fundamental freedoms in the  political, economic,  social, cultural, civil or any other field."  Article 2(b)  enjoins the State parties while condemning discrimination against women in all its forms, to pursue, by  appropriate means, without delay, elimination of discrimination  against   women  by   adopting  "appropriate legislative and  other measures  including  sanctions  where appropriate, prohibiting  all discriminations against women" to take  all appropriate  measures including legislation, to modify or  abolish   existing laws, regulations, customs and practices which  constitute  discrimination  against  women. Clause (C)  enjoins to ensure legal protection of the rights of  women  on  equal  basis  with  men  through  constituted national tribunals and other public institutions against any act of  discrimination to  provide effective  protection  to women.  Article 3 enjoins State parties  that it shall take, in   all fields,  in particular,  in the  political, social, economic  and  cultural  fields,  all  appropriate  measures including  legislation   to  ensure   full  development  and advancement of  women for   the purpose of guaranteeing them the exercise  and  enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms on   the  basis of  equality with  men. Article  13 states that  "the State  parties shall  take all appropriate measures to  eliminate discrimination against women in other areas of  economic and  social life in order to ensure, on a basis of  equality of  men and  women’.  Article  14    lays emphasis to  eliminate discrimination  on the problems faced by rural women so as to enable them to play "in the economic

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 21  

survival of  their families including their work in the non- monetized sectors  of the  economy  and  shall  take...  all appropriate measures...."  Participation in and benefit from rural development  in particular, shall ensure to such women the right  to participate  in the  development programme  to organize self groups and cooperatives to obtain equal access to  economic   opportunities  through  employment  or  self- employment etc.   Article  15(2) enjoins  to accord to women equality  with   men  before  the  law,  in  particular,  to administer property......."      The Parliament  has enacted  the  Protection  of  Human Rights Act,  1993, Section 2(b) defines human rights to mean "the rights  relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the  individual guaranteed  by the Constitution, embodied in the  international Conventions  and enforceable by courts in India".  Thereby the principles embodied in CEDAW and the concomitant Right  to Development  became integral  parts of the Indian  Constitution and the Human Rights Act and became enforceable. Section  12 of  Protection of  Human Rights Act charges the  Commission with  duty for proper implementation as well  as prevention  of violation of the human rights and fundamental freedoms.      Article 5(a)  of CEDAW to which the Government of India expressed reservation  does not stand in its way and in fact Article 2(f)  denudes its  effect and  enjoins to  implement Article 2(f)  read  with  its  obligation  undertaken  under Articles 3,  14 and  15 of the Convention vis a-vis Articles 1, 3,  6 and  8 of  the Declaration of Right to Development. Though  the  directive  principles  and  fundamental  rights provide the  matrix for development of human personality and elimination of discrimination, these conventions add urgency and teeth  for immediate  implementation. It  is, therefore, imperative for  the State  to eliminate  obstacles, prohibit all gender  based discriminations as mandated by Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India. By operation of Article 2(f) and  other related  articles of CEDAW, the State should by appropriate  measures including  legislation, modify  law and abolish  gender based  discrimination  in  the  existing laws, regulations, customs and practices which constitute discrimination against women.      Article 15(3)  of the  Constitution of India positively protects  such   Acts  or   actions.  Article   21  of   the Constitution of  India reinforces  "right to life". Equality dignity of  person and  right to  development  are  inherent rights in  every human  being. Life  in its expanded horizon includes all  that give meaning to a person’s life including cultures heritage  and tradition with dignity of person. The fulfillment of that heritage in full measure would encompass the right  to life. For its meaningfulness and purpose every woman  is   entitled  to   elimination  of   obstacles   and discrimination based  on gender for human development. Women are  entitled   to  enjoy   economic,  social  cultural  and political rights  without discrimination  and on  footing of equality. Equally,  in order  to effectuate fundamental duty to develop  scientific temper  humanism and  the  spirit  of enquiry and  to strive  towards excellence in all sphere; of individual and  collective activities as enjoined in Article 51A(h) and  (j) of  the  Constitution  of  India,  not  only facilities and opportunities are to be provided for but also all  forms   of  gender   based  discrimination   should  be eliminated. It  is a  mandate to the State to do these acts. Property is  one of  the  important  endowments  or  natural assets to accord opportunity, source to develop personality, to be  independent right  to equal  status  and  dignity  of person. Therefore,  the State  should create  conditions and

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 21  

facilities conducive  for women  to  realize  the  right  to economic development including social and cultural rights.      Bharat Ratna  Dr. B.R. Ambedkar stated, on the floor of the Constituent Assembly that in future both the legislature and the  executive should  not pay  mere lip  service to the directive principles  but they should be made the bastion of all  executive   and  legislative  action.  Legislative  and executive actions  must be  conformable to, and effectuation of the  fundamental rights  guaranteed in  Part III  and the directive principles  enshrined in  Part IV and the Preamble of the  Constitution  which  constitute  conscience  of  the Constitution. Covenants of the United Nation add impetus and urgency   to    eliminate   gender   based   obstacles   and discrimination.  Legislative   action  should   be   devised suitably to  constitute economic  empowerment  of  women  in socio-economic  restructure   for  establishing  egalitarian social order.  Law is an instrument of social change as well as the  defender for  social change.  Article 2(e)  of CEDAW enjoins this  Court to breath life into the dry bones of the Constitution, international  Conventions and  the Protection of Human  Rights Act, to prevent gender based discrimination and to  effectuate right  to life  including empowerment  of economic, social and cultural rights.      As per  the U.N. Report 1980 "woman constitute half the world population,  perform nearly  two thirds of work hours, receive one  tenth of  the world’s  income and own less than one hundredth  per cent  of world’s  property". Half  of the Indian population  too are  women. Women  have  always  been discriminated  and   have   suffered   and   are   suffering discrimination in  silence. Self-sacrifice  and  self-denial are their  nobility and  fortitude and  yet they  have  been subjected to  all inequities,  indignities,  inequality  and discrimination.  Articles   13,  14,   15  and   16  of  the Constitution of  India and  other related  articles prohibit discrimination on  the ground  of sex.  Social and  economic democracy  is  the  cornerstone  for  success  of  political democracy. The Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and women, from time  immemorial, suffered  discrimination  and  social inequalities and  made them  to accept their ascribed social status. Among  woman, the tribal women are the lowest of the low. It  is mandatory,  therefore,  to  render  them  socio- economic justice so as to ensure their dignity of person, so that they  be brought  into the  mainstream of  the national life. We  are conscious  that in  Article 25  which  defines Hindus, Scheduled Tribes were not brought within its fold to protect their  customs and  identity. We keep it at the back of our mind.      Agricultural land  is the  foundation  of  a  sense  of security and  freedom from  fear. Assured  possession  is  a lasting road  for development,  intellectual,  cultural  and moral and  also for  peace and  harmony. Agriculture  is the only sources  of  livelihood  for  the  tribes,  apart  from collection and  sale of  minor forest produce. Land is their most important natural asset and imperishable endowment from which the  tribals derive their sustenance, social status, a permanent place  of abode  and work.  The  Scheduled  Tribes predominantly live  in Andhra  Pradesh, Maharashtra,  Bihar, Gujarat, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and North Eastern States, though they spread to other States sparsely.      The empirical study by Anthropologists and Sociologists reveals that  the customary  laws  of  the  tribes  are  not uniform throughout  Bharat. Even  in  respect  of  intestate succession, the  are not  uniform. Though the customs of the tribes have  been elevated  to the  status of law, obviously recognized by  the founding  fathers in  Article 13(3)(a) of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 21  

the Constitution,  yet it  is  essential  that  the  customs inconsistent with or repugnant to constitutional scheme must always yield  place to  fundamental rights.  In Sant  Ram v. Labh Singh,  [(1965) 7  SCR 756].  this Court  held that the custom  as  such  is  effected  by  part  III  dealing  with fundamental rights In Bahu Ram v. Baijnath Singh [1962 Supp. (3) SCR  724],it was  held that  law of pre-emption based on vicinage is  void. In G. Dasaratha Rama Rao v. State of A.P. [(1961) 2  SCR 931],  this Court  held  that  discrimination based on the ground of descent only offends Article 16(2)      In India  agricultural  land  forms  the  bulk  of  the property. In  most of  the tenancy  laws,  women  have  been denied the  right to  succession to  agricultural lands. The discernible reason  in support  thereof  appears  to  be  to maintain unity of the family and to prevent fragmentation of agricultural holdings or diversion of tenancy right. In Atam Prakash v. State of Haryana, [(1986) 2 SCC 249], testing the validity of  Section 15  of the Punjab Pre-emption Act 1930, for the  aforesaid reasons this Court held that the right of pre-emption based  on consanguinity is a relic of the feudal past. It  is totally  inconsistent with  the  constitutional scheme. It  is inconsistent  with modern  ideas. The reasons which justified  its recognition,  quarter of a century ago, namely, the  preservation of the integrity of rural society, the  unity   of  family  life  and  the  agnatic  theory  of succession, are  today  irrelevant.  Classification  on  the basis of unity and integrity of either the village community or the  family or  on the  basis of  the agnatic  theory  of succession, cannot  be upheld.  Due to march of history, the tribal loyalties  have disappeared and family ties have been weakened or broken and the traditional rural family oriented society is  permissible. Accordingly  Section 15(1), clauses (1) to  (3), violates  fundamental rights  and were declared ultra vires.      When male member has the right to seek partition and at his behest, fragmentation of family holding is effected, why not the  right  to  inheritance/succession  be  given  to  a female? On  agnatic theory,  she  gets  a  shadow,  but  not substance. Right  to  equality  and  social  justice  in  an illusion. The  denial is absolutely inconsistent with public policy, unfair,  unjust and  unconscionable. The  reason  of fragmentation of  holding or division of tenancy right would hardly be  a ground to discriminate against a woman from her right to  inherit the  property of the parent or husband. In V. Tulasamma v. Sesha Reddy [AIR 1977 SC 1944 at 1961], this Court, cognizant  to equality  in  intestate  succession  by Hindu woman,  held that after the advent of independence old human values  assumed new  complex; women need emancipation; new social order need to be set up giving women equality and place of  honour, abolition of discrimination based on equal right to succession is the prime need of the hour and temper of the  times. In  Chiranjeet Lal  vs. Union of India, [1950 SCR 869,  this Court  held that  the guarantee  against  the denial of  equal protection  of the  law does  not mean that identically the  same rule  of law should be made applicable to all  persons within  the territory  of India  in spite of difference in  circumstances or  conditions. It  means  that there should  be no  discrimination between  one person  and another. It  is with  regard to  the subject  matter of  the legislation. In  State of  West Bengal  v. Anwar  Ali Sarkar [1952 SCR  869], it  was held  that  the  prohibition  under Article 14  is to  secure all persons against arbitrary laws as well  as arbitrary  application of  laws. It  applies  to procedural and  substantive law.  Menaka Gandhi  v. Union of India [(1978)  2 SCR 621, reiterates its creed on grounds of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 21  

justice,  equity   and  fairness   lest  law  becomes  void, oppressive, unjust and unfair.      Eugine Smith in his Indian Constitution has stated that secularisation of  law is  essential  to  the  emergence  of modern Indian  State, foundation  of which  stands  on  twin principles of  democracy and  secularism. He  further stated that "the  existence of  different personal  law contradicts the principles  of non-discrimination  by the  State".  Non- discrimination is based on the philosophy of the individual, not the  group, as the focal point and the basic unit of the nation. The  civilization, culture,  custom, usage  religion and law  are founded  upon the community life for man’s well being. The  man will  obey the  command of  the community by consent. The  law formulates  the principles to maintain the order in  the society  to avoid  friction. Democracy  brings about bloodless  revolution in the social order through rule of law.  Therefore, when women are discriminated only on the ground of  sex in  the matter of intestate succession to the estate of  the parent  or husband,  the  basic  question  is whether it  is founded on intelligible diffetentia and bears reasonable   or    rational   relation    or   whether   the discrimination is  just and  fair.  Our  answer  as  no  and emphatically no.      In State  of Bihar  v. Kameswar  Singh, [1952 SCR 889], this Court  had held  that in  judging the reasonableness in imposing restrictions  Court would  take into  consideration public purpose  in Article  39. In  Kasturi Devi v. State of Karnataka, [(1980)  4 SCC 1], this Court held that if law is made to  further socioeconomic  justice it  is  prima  facie reasonable and  in public interest. In other words, if it is in negation,  it  is  unconstitutional.  In  Chandra  Bhavan Boarding House   v.  State of Mysore, [(1970) 2 SCR 600], it was held that "the mandate of the Constitution is to build a welfare society  and aspirations aroused by the Constitution will be  belied if  the minimum  needs of  the lowest of our citizen are  not met. In Narendar Prasad v. State Of Gujarat (1975) 2 SCR 317], it was held that no right in an organised society can  be absolute.  Enjoyment of one’s rights must be consistent with  the enjoyment of the rights of others. In a free play  of social  forces, it  is not  possible to  bring about a  voluntary harmony;  the state has to step in to set right the imbalance and the directive principles, though not enforceable; mandate  of Article  38, to  restructure social and economic  democracy, enjoins  to eliminate obstacles and prohibit discrimination  in intestate  succession  based  on sex.      In Thota  Sesharathamma v.  Thota Manikyamma,  [JT 1991 (3) SC  506], construing  Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act 1956  and its  revolutionary  effect  on  the  right  to ownership of  the land  by Hindu woman, this Court held that the validity  of Section  14(1) drawn  from the pre-existing limited estate  held by  a Hindu woman must be tested on the anvil of  socioeconomic justice,  equality of  status and by overseeing whether it subserve the constitutional animation. Article  15(3)  relieves  the  State  from  the  bondage  of Articles 14  and  15(1)  and  charges  it  to  make  special provision to accord socioeconomic equality to woman.      The Hindu  Succession Act revolutionised the therefore, endeavor to  find out whether the disposition clauses in the instrument will  elongate the  animation   of Section 14 and would permeate  the aforestated constitutional conscience to relieve the  Hindu female   from  the  Sashtric  bondage  of limited  estate.   Articles  14,   15  and  16  frowns  upon discrimination on  any ground   and enjoin the State to make special provisions  in   favour of  the woman to remedy past

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 21  

injustice and  to advance  their socioeconomic and political status. Economic  necessity is  not  a  sanctuary  to  abuse woman’s person.  Section 14, therefore, gives to every Hindu woman full  ownership-of the  property irrespective  of  the time when  the acquisition was made, namely, whether  it was before or  after the  Act had come into force, provided, she was in  possession of  the property.  Discrimination on  the ground of  sex in  matter of  public employment  was  buried fathom deep  and is  now a relic of the past by decisions of this court. In C.B. Methama v. Union of India, [(1980) 1 SCR 668], Air  India v.  Nagesh Mirza, [(1982) 1 SCR 438], and a host of  other decisions are in that path, True that clauses (h) and (j) of para 3 of Schedule 6 of the Constitution give power to  District or  Regional Councils  in  North  Eastern States to  alter law  relating to  inheritance and  customs; they   too are  bound  by  the  law  declared  under article 141 of   the Constitution  to  be  consistent  with Articles 15(3), 14 and Preamble of the Constitution.      The  public   policy  and   constitutional   philosophy envisaged under  Articles 38,  39, 46 and 15(1) & (3) and 14 is to  accord social  and economic  democracy  to  women  as assured in  the preamble of the Constitution They constitute core foundation  for economic empowerment and social justice to women  for stability  of political  democracy.  In  other words, they  frown upon  gender discrimination  and  aim  at elimination  of   obstacles  to   enjoy  social,   economic, political and  Cultural rights  on equal  footing. Law  is a living organism  and its utility depends on its vitality and ability to  serve as  sustaining pillar of society. contours of law  in evolving society must constantly keep changing as civilization and  culture advances.  The customs  and  mores must undergo  change with  march of  time,  Justice  to  the individual is one of the highest interests of the democratic State judiciary  cannot protect  the interests of the common man  unless   it  would  redefine  the  protections  of  the Constitution and the common law if law is to adapt itself to the needs  of the  changing society, it must be flexible and adaptable.      Law is  the manifestation  of  principles  of  justice, equity and  good conscience.  Rule of law should establish a uniform pattern  for harmonious existence in a society where every individual  would exercise  his  rights  to  his  best advantage  to  achieve  excellence,  subject  to  protective discrimination. The  best advantage  of one  person could be the worst  disadvantage to another. Law steps in to iron out such  creases   and  ensures   equality  of   protection  to individuals as  well as  group liberties.  Man’s status is a creature of  substantive as  well as procedural law to which legal  incidents   would  attach.   Justice,  equality   and fraternity are  trinity for  social and  economic  equality. therefore, law  is the  foundation on which the potential of the  society   stands.  In   Sheikriyammada  Nalla  Koya  v. Administrator, Union  Territory  of  Laccadives,  [AIR  1967 Kerala 259],  K.K. Methew.  J., as  he then  was, held  that customs which  are immoral are opposed to public policy, can neither be  recognized nor  be enforced.  Its angulation and perspectives were stated by the learned judge thus:      "It is  admitted  that  the  custom      must not be unreasonable or opposed      to public  policy. But the question      is  unreasonable   to  whom?  Is  a      custom which  appears  unreasonable      to the  Judge  be  adjudged  so  or      should  he   be   guided   by   the      prevailing public  opinion  of  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 21  

    community in  the place  where  the      custom prevails?  It has  been said      that the  Judge should  not consult      his own  standards or predilections      but those  of the  dominant opinion      at the  given moment,  and that  in      arriving at the decisions the Judge      should    consider    the    social      consequences    of    the    custom      especially  in  the  light  of  the      factual evidence  available  as  to      its probable  consequences. A judge      may not  set himself  in opposition      to a custom which is fully accepted      by the community.           But I  think, that  the  Judge      should not  follow merely  the mass      opinion  when   it  is  clearly  in      error,  but   on  the  contrary  he      should direct  it,  not  by  laying      down his  own personal and isolated      conceptions but by resting upon the      opinion of  the healthy elements of      the population,  whose guardians of      an  ancient  tradition,  which  has      proved itself  and which  serves to      inspire  not   only  those   of   a      conservative spirit  but also those      who   desire   in   a   loyal   and      disinterested   spirit    to   make      radical    alterations    to    the      organizations of  existing society.      Thus, the  judge is  not  bound  to      heed  even   to  the  clearly  held      opinion of  the greater majority of      the community  if he  is  satisfied      that that  opinion is  abhorrent to      right  thinking  people.  In  other      words, the  judge would consult not      his personal  inclinations but  the      sense and  needs and  the mores  of      the  community   in  a   spirit  of      impartiality."      As in other parts of the country, in Bihar, most of the tribes  like   Munda,  Oraom   and  Ho   practised  shifting cultivation along with the settled cultivation as it has not been popular  with  the  tribe  to  combine  various  modern productive technology.  But, by  passage of  time, when  the land has  become scarce,  they  too  have  settled  down  to ploughing cultivation  on  fixed  tenures.  Due  to  diverse reasons which  it is  not necessary  for the purpose of this case to  elaborate, major  part of the land slipped out from their holdings.      Notable researchers,  who  spent  their  valuable  time living among  the tribes,  are W.G. Archer, Dy. Commissioner Santhal Pargana during 1939-40, Prof. Christopher Von Furer- Haimendorf, a  German  Sociologist  appointed  by  Nizam  of Hyderabad in  1940 who  spent his  life with  the tribals in Nizam State in Andhra Pradesh as well as Arunanchal Pradesh. Portrayed  life   style  and  customs  operating  among  the Tribals, Haimendorf  says  in  his  "Tribes  in  India,  the Struggle for  Survival"  that  Chenchoo  women,  tribals  in Andhra Pradesh,  enjoy equal  status with  men. They can own property, but they can not inherit any substantial property. They abide by the decision of their husbands. they are equal

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 21  

companions with  men doing as much. if not more, of the work in maintaining  the common  household. She  and her husband, are joint possessors of the family property insofar as it is acquired by  the daily labour. In South India, in particular Andhra Pradesh,  after the  grant of  ryotwari pattas to the tillers of  the soil  including  the  tribes,  they  acquire permanent right  to fixed  land holdings  and there does not exist any  discrimination in  matter of intestate succession between man  and woman. Issues in Tribal Development by Prof P. Ramaiah of Kakatiya University, Andhra Pradesh at. page 9 it  dated   that  "hereditary   rights  rule   the  property distribution arrangement,  It a  man dies  his wife and sons get equal  share of property. Widow gets her husband’s share form the  property". At page 14 he has further stated, "land is part of his spiritual as well as economic heritage".      Dr L.P. Vidyarthi in his Tribal Development Act and Its Administration, published  by Concept  Publishing Co., (1986 Edn.), has  stated at page 310 that the element of certainty and definiteness  of custom in the tribal society is lacking because of  divergent customs  on the  same issue adopted by different sections  of the  tribes. The element of antiquity is also  of little  aid in  that behalf.  In Tribal Society, custom is  generally product of dominating mind, nurtured in the belief  of super-natural forces and taboos than a source of spontaneous growth. It is mostly based upon the totem and taboos evolved  in a  particular family  having the force of the family  law. The  custom in  the tribal  society is much influenced by  the instinct  of possessive authority and not on the  basis of  sociological  origin    but  it  has  been carried, generation  after generation,  as  being the family law. No  scientific explanations  are  available, but if the custom is examined in detail it is  found deep rooted on the element of  totem  and  taboos.  That  is  the  reason  that majority of  the customs   prevailing  in the tribal society could not  attain the   status  of law and there is no legal validity except in  the cases of inheritance and some family laws like  adoption and marriage. If the working and life of the tribal  societies is minutely observed, it will be found that from morning till night, with the birth of a baby  till death, agricultural  operations are the sole  occupation for livelihood; all  are tagged,  linked and  based upon certain conduct and  behaviour reflecting,  nearly custom and it may be said  that entire  tribal society is based upon the rigid rules of  custom and  any   society still  untouched by  the influence of  urbanisation   exists  in  the  phenomenon  of religion mixed with magic custom.      Archer in  his "Tribal  Law and  Justice -  The Santhal View of  Woman" has  stated in  1939-40 that  the  unmarried daughter has  ordinarily no right at all in land. She cannot ask for  partition and  if her  brothers separate, some land may be  kept by  her father  or brother  for  financing  her marriage and  maintaining her,  but that is to fulfill their duties towards  her and does not confer upon her any rights. At the  partition, she is given no share. She has a right to maintenance. If  her father  or brothers or father’s agnates are against  discharging their  duties, she can claim enough land for keeping her till marriage. She can acquire the land of her  own which  is her  absolute property.  If her father dies leaving  no other  heirs or  agnates, she  will get his land until  she is  married. If  she is married, her sisters will share  equally with  her. If  she has  no sisters,  the property goes  to the  village  community.  With  regard  to married daughters,  he stated,  that two  to three bighas of land would be given as Stridhan" at the time af marriage" In respect of  that property,  right of  the fathers brother or

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 21  

agnates are extinguished. The property given is her absolute property.  Her  children  inherit  her  property.  In  their absence, it  passes on to the father, brother, mother or her male agnates.  With regard to the right of married woman, at page 156,  he has  stated that  at partition  the  wife  and children get  one share  and the  husband gets one share. He has given  instances of  one Safal  Hansdeak of Tharia. With regard to  the right of the widow, she is like a Hindu widow having right  to maintenance.  If her  husband died while he was joint holder with his brothers she will continue to live in the  family and  the situation will not differ materially from what  it was  in her  husband’s lifetime.  Her right to maintenance  will  continue  and  if  her  husband’s  family neglects her  without cause,  she can demand sufficient land to keep herself, If there is a complete family partition the widow and  her children  will get the share which would have gone to  her husband had he been alive. She gets life estate like Hindu  widow’s estate, "The Madras and their Courts" by Sarad Chandra  Roy, 14th  Ed. at  p.244 to  451 (19159.  The Origins of Chotanagpur by Sarad Chandra Roy at p. 369 to 370 (1915 Ed.)  dealt with  inheritance on  the same  lines,  So they need no reiteration.      In Doman  Sahu v.  Buka, [AIR  1931 Patna  198], though Mundas and  Mundari women  in Ranchi  District are  akin  to other tribals,  since they  regard themselves  as Hindus, It was   held that Hindu law of succession would apply to them. In Ganesh Matho v. Shib Charan, [AIR 1931 Patna 305],, Kurmi Mahtons of Chota Nagpur adopted Hindu religion. The Division Bench held that it must be presumed that ordinarily they are governed  by   Hindu  law  in  matters  of  inheritance  and succession  except  insofar  as  parties  prove  any  custom obtaining among  them which  is at  variance with it. It was held that  Mitakshara Hindu law of succession was applicable to them. They did not prove any special custom alleged them. In  "Law   Enforcement  in  Tribal  Areas"  by  S.K.  Ghosh, Director,  Law  Institute,  Calcutta,  published  by  Ashish Publishing House  at page  89 it  is stated  that though the Hindu Succession  Act 1956  Hindu marriage  Act 1954,  Hindu Adoption and  Maintenance Act 1956 did not apply, because of their contracts  with other  advanced societies some changes have taken place among tribes in the observance of marriage, divorce, etc.  In the  event of  any litigation,  the tribal courts are  unable to  reach a  definite conclusion as these customary codes  as they  are unwritten  code. Therefore, it was recommend  that a proper study of customary codes of the tribals  should  be  made  and  the  same  may  be  codified properly. "  "Some  State  governments  have  already  taken action to  codify the  personal  laws  of  important  tribal groups. These  laws  can  be  gradually  dispensed  with  or repealed when  the tribals  are fully  assimilated with  the main body  of our  national community"  at  pages  90-91  he explained the  customs among  the  hills  living  in  Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan who constitute largest tribal group in the country  of a  marriage by  elopement or  capture or  by arrangement. They  are vary  truthful people and they do not hesitate to  speak against  the culprits,  though  they  may happen to be kith and kin.      The Garos,  the Khasis  and the  Jhintias are  the main inhabitants of  Meghalya State.  They observe  monogamy. The daughter  (Nokma   Dongipa  Hechik)  descendant    from  the ancestor is  chosen for  marriage for common  ancestors. The husband goes  and lives  with the  wife which  in Hindu  law known as  Illatom son-in-law. The custom is that the senior- most household  of the area  maintains a line of inheritance from the   mother  to the chosen daughter and the husband of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 15 of 21  

the  inheritress    mother,  popularly  known  as  Nokma  is accepted as  the constitutional  head of  the  A’Khing.  The lands are  held   in common  ownership of  the machong,  the usufruct rights   are  granted to  all the  residents of the A’Khing.  Mikirs,   a  populous   tribe  in   Meghalaya   is patrilineal. The  sons   inherit property  and it is divided among them.  In the     absence of  male heirs,  the nearest agnate inherits  that      land.  The  daughters  have  been excluded. In  the absence   of  sons and brothers, the widow retains  the  property  provided  she  marries  one  of  her husband’s clan. The Gonds in Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and  Orissa observe  monogamy. At  page  139,  he  has stated that  the custom  is heritable  and transferable  and right of  inheritance is  patrilineal. The  male heirs would succeed and  the females  are completely  excluded. The sons take equal  shares, but  among the Apa Tanis and the Nactes, the system  of primogeniture  prevails, i.e.  the eldest son only inherits  the father’s  landed property  which has been softened among  Apa Tanis.  In  Manipur,  the  custom  among Thandon Kukis  is that  the property  is of the Chief of the village. The  practice is  of shifting  cultivation and  the Chief distributes  the plots among the groups. The system of inheritance among the Naga group is that at the death of the last owner,  the succession  is by patrilineal and the rules of primogeniture  prevails among  them. The practice is that during his  life-time the  father gives  some  land  to  the younger brother as well.      In a  report on  Codification  of  Customary  Laws  and Inheritance Laws  in the  Tribal Societies  of Orissa by Dr. Bhupinder Singh  and Dr.  Neeti Mahanti  of Jigyansu  Tribal Research Centre,  sponsored  by  the  Ministry  of  Welfare, Government of  India and  submitted on  May 19,  1993, it is stated at  page 1  in last  paragraph of his preface that to reduce  tribal   customary  laws   into  formal,  technical, straight-jacket frame  is likely  to rob  it of its vitality and strength.  It will expose the innocent, gullible tribals to the  machinations of  touts, middle-men  etc. The customs which differ,  in whatever  magnitude, from one community to other would  help exploitation of the tribals by application of  the   traditional  law.  Its  relevance,  freshness  and vitality to a considerable extent, would get weakened. Whims and fancies  in dispensation  of justice  would be  avoided. They  concluded  that  "we  must  proceed  deliberately  and wirely." In Chapter III at page 8 it is stated thus:      "Customary law refers to rules that      are transmitted  from generation to      generation      through      social      inheritance. In a close-knit simple      tribal    society,    the    people      themselves want  to live  according      to   customs   backed   by   social      sanctions;  to   save   them   from      objection and  social  ridicule  of      the society."      At page  9, it  is stated  that  "the  major  areas  of interest for  a tribal  community is  inheritance  of  land, forest rights  and social  customs like  marriage,  divorce, desertion, child  support, death,  birth etc." Santhals, one of the  largest tribes  of India  spread over  West  Bengal, Orissa, Bihar and parts of Assam and Tripura. It is observed at page  30 on the "Chapter Succession to Proeprty" that the succession is  in favour  of the  son, in his absence to the daughter, in  their absence  to  the  relative.  Even  among Santhals, it  is not  strictly patrileneal.  If they have no son, succession  is open  to the  daughter and  if they have

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 16 of 21  

neither son nor daughter then to the relative of the family. Some people  among them  preferred succession  among son and daughter equally.  On husband’s  demise. the  widow  gets  a share in  the property,  as life-estate. In their conclusion at page  37, they  have stated  that the  Santhals and Saora tribals practice  patrilineal is  a mode  of succession.  At pages 38-43,  after detailed  discussion it  is stated  that though  there   is  considerable   "on-going   acculturation process", the  tribes  have  not  completely  discarded  the customs. At  page 45,  it was  mentioned that though Santhal society is  predominantly patrilineal,  they do not strictly adhere to  it. The inheritance in favour of the daughter has been softened  but Soara  society is  conservative and  less exposed to winds of change. They preferred sons to daughters only if there is no son in the family and other relatives of the family.  However, the  widow inherits  the estate of her husband. The  working group of the 7th Five Year Plan on the tribal development  recommended  codification  of  customary laws prevalent among the tribals in its report at pages 323- 24 of the Planning Commission documents. Dr. B.L. Maharde, a bureaucrat of  Rajasthan Civil Services, in his "History and Culture of  Girjans" in the State of Rajasthan, narrated the practices of  tribals at  page 84  stating that the property after the  death of  the father is equally divided among the sons by  the village  elders of  Panchayat and  in  case  of dispute. by  the private  Panchayat. The youngest son, since he lives  with his  father, is  entitled to  have  an  extra share. The  grandson of  his pre-deceased son is entitled to an equal  share. Daughters are not entitled to inherit their fathers’ property, but they can share the animal wealth. The son-in-law is  entitled to  equal share. The widow has right to property which she loses on her remarriage. We do not get any material  as regards  succession among  the  tribals  in Madhya Pradesh,  Maharashtra and  Gujarat and in view of the general  trend   we  assume   that  in   those  States  also partilineal succession would be in vogue.      It would  thus be  seen  that  the  customs  among  the Scheduled Tribes,  vary from  tribe to  tribe and  region to region, based  upon the  established practice  prevailing in the  respective   regions  and   among  particular   tribes. Therefore,  it   would  be   difficult  to  decide,  without acceptable material  among  each  tribe,  whether  customary succession is  valid, certain  ancient  and  consistent  and whether it  has acquired  the status  of  law.  However,  as noticed above,  Customs are  prevalent  and  being  followed among the  tribes in  matters of  succession and inheritance apart from  other customs  like marriage,  divorce etc. Cus- toms became  part or  the tribal  laws as  a guide  to their attitude and  practice in  their social life and not a final definition of  law. They  are accepted  as set of principles and are  being applied  when succession  is open.  They have accordingly nearly  occurred the  status of  law. Except  in Meghalaya, throughout  the country patrilineal succession is being followed  according to  the unwritten code of customs. Like in  Hindu law,  they prefer  son to the daughter and in his absence  daughter succeeds  to  the  estate  as  limited owner. Widow also gets only limited estate. More than 80 per cent of  the population is still below poverty line and they did not  come at  par with  civilized sections  of the  non- tribals. Under  these circumstances,  it is not desirable to grant general  declaration that  the custom  of  inheritance offends Articles  14, 15  and 21  of the  Constitution. Each case must be examined and decided as and when full facts are placed before the Court.      Section 2(2)  of the  Hindu Succession  Act, similar to

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 17 of 21  

Hindu Marriage  Act, Hindu  Adoption  and  Maintenance  Act, excludes applicability of customs to the Scheduled Tribes as defined by  clause (25)  of Article  366 of the Constitution unless  the  Central  Government,  by  notification  in  the official  Gazette   otherwise  directs.  Explanation  11  to Article 25  does not include them as Hindus. The Chotanagpur Tenancy Act  and the Santhal Parganas Tenancy (Supplementary Provisions) Act, 1949, the Bihar Scheduled Areas Regulation, 1969 intend  to protect  the lands  of the tribals and their restoration to them Section 7 and 8 of the Act regulates the right of  Khuntketti  Raiyats.  By  operation  of  customary inheritance, the  son and  lineal  descendants  inherit  the lands held  by the  tribes for the purpose of cultivation by himself or  male members of his family. Section 76 read with Section 6  gives effect  to custom, usage or customary right provided thereunder not inconsistent with or not necessarily modified or  abolished by the provisions of the Act. The law exists to  serve the  needs of the society which is governed by it.  If the  law is  to play its allotted role of serving the needs  of the  society, it  must reflect  the ideas  and ideologies of  that society. As stated earlier, it must keep pace with  march of time with the heart beats of the society and with  the needs  and aspirations of the people. As seen, even among  the tribals  in  Bihar,  the  customs  have  now undergone advancement.  They prefer  both son  and  daughter alike  though  not  uniformly.  Succession  is  patrilineal; Santhals practically  adapted the  Mitakshara Hindu  law  of succession. The  Hindu  Succession  Act  modified  the  pre- existing  law   and  intestate  succession  gives  right  of succession to  Hindu  female.  Section  14(1)  has  enlarged limited estate  known to  Sastric law into absolute right of property held by a Hindu female. In the Law of Intestate and Testamentary Succession,  (1991 Ed.) at page 21, Prof. Diwan has stated  that Section  2(2) does  not mean that Scheduled Tribes which  were, prior to the codified Hindu law governed by Hindu  law will not, now be governed by the Hindu law. If before codification  any Scheduled  Tribe  was  governed  by Hindu law it will continue to be governed by it. However, it would be  uncodified Hindu  law that would apply to them. It is settled  law that the procedural or substantive law which offend the  fundamental right  are void.  Section 7 and 8 of the Act  exclude  woman  tribals  from  inheritance  to  the Khuntkutti raiyati  rights solely  on the  basis of  sex and confine succession  and inheritance  among male  descendants only In  Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India [(1978) 2 SCR 621], this Court  held that reasonableness is an essential element of equality;  non-arbitrariness  pervades  Article  14.  The Court must  consider the direct and inevitable effect of the action in  adjudging whether  the State  action offends  the fundamental right  of the  individual. This  Court sustained the validity  of Passport  Act by reading down the statutory provisions. Justice, equity and good conscience are integral part of  equality under Article 14 of the Constitution which is the  genus and Article 15 is its specie. In Harbans Singh v. Guranchatta  Singh [(1991)  1 SCR  614)], this Court held that though  the Transfer of Property Act did not t apply to the State  of Punjab  at  the  relevant  time,  the  general principles contained  therein being consistent with justice, equity and good conscience would apply.      Under the General Clauses Act, male includes female. In Jitmohan Singh  Munda v.  Ramratan  singh  [1958  Bihar  law Journal Report  373], interpreting  Mundari Khunt  Kattidari widow’s right  to remain  in  possession  of  Mundari  Khunt Kattidari tenancy, after the death of her husband, the Bihar High Court  held that  the widow  would have  life estate in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 18 of 21  

tenancy  rights   as  they   have  adopted    Hindu  law  of succession.  There   is  no   reference  whatsoever  to  the exclusion  of  the  widow  of  the      particular  Mundari. Therefore, in  respect of  Khunt    Kattidari  tenancy,  the widow would  be entitled to possession  and Section a is not inconsistent with  that   position. In  Jani Bai v. State of Rajasthan  [AIR   1989  RAJ.  115],  interpreting  Rajasthan Colonisation Act,   1954,  the Division Bench held that male descendants   would include female descendants and the adult son and   the  daughter should  be treated  alike both being equally   eligible for  allotment under the rules under that Act. By  operation of  Section 13(1) of General Clauses Act, males includes  females, of  course,  subject  to  statutory scheme which  by now  is subject  to  the  Constitution.  In Sections 7 and 8 of the Act if the words "male  descendants" are read  to include  female  descendants,  the    daughter, married or  unmarried and  the widow are entitled to succeed to the  estate of  the father,  husband   or son.  Scheduled ribes are  as much  citizens as others   and are entitled to equality. Sections 7 and 8 are  accordingly read down and so on that premise are valid.      The question  then is  whether the  interpretation   is consistent  with   Sub-s.(2)  of  Section  4  of  the  Hindu Succession Act,  1956? Entry  7 of  list  III    of  Seventh Schedule to  the  Government  of  India  Act  1935  provided "Wills,   intestacy   and   succession   save   as   regards agricultural land."  Entry 5  of the  Concurrent List in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution omitted the words "save as  regards   agricultural  lands’   and   provided   merely "intestacy and  succession; joint  family and partition". In Basavant Gouda  v. Smt. Channabasawwa [AIR 1971 Mysore 151], division Bench of Mysore High Court in paragraph 11 had held that Entry  5 of the Concurrent List of the Seventh Schedule would apply  to succession of agricultural lands under Hindu Succession Act.  It followed  the judgment  of Amar Singh v. Baldev Singh  [ AIR  1960 Punjab  666] (Full  Bench) in  its support. The  same view was taken by a Division Bench of the Orissa High  Court, in  a judgment rendered by B. Jagannadha Das, J.,  as he  then was,  in Laxmi Debi v. S.K. Panda [AIR 1957 Orissa 1].      In Gopi Chand v. Bhagwani Devi [AIR 1964 Punjab 272], a Division Bench  of Punjab High Court had held that Sub-s.(2) of Section  4 of  Hindu Succession Act does not apply to the Delhi Land  Reforms Act  conferring permanent tenancy rights of Bhumidar  or asami,  laid down in Section 50 of that Act. If it  is otherwise,  it would  be inconsistent with Section 4(1) of  the Hindu  Succession Act  and would  be  void.  In Phulmani Dibya  v. State  of Orissa  [AIR 1974 Orissa 135] a Full Bench  has held that exclusion of woman from succession to any  Brahmottar grant  discriminates against  woman under Article 15 on ground of sex and that, therefore, become said offending Article  15(1). In Tokha v. Smt. Samman, [AIR 1977 Punjab and  Haryana 406]  a single Judge of that. Court held that the  occupancy rights  held by  a limited owner (widow) before  the  Hindu  Succession  Act  had  come  into  force, enlarged as  absolute property  under the  Punjab  Occupancy Tenants (Vesting  of Proprietary Rights) Act and thereby she become an  absolute owner and was entitled to gift over that land as to absolute owner which was upheld.      In Mayne’s  Hindu Law  and Usage (13th Ed.), revised by Justice A.  Kuppuswami, commenting  on  Sub-section  (2)  of Section 4  of Hindu  Succession Act, in paragraph 17 at page 960, it  is observed that the legislature can always provide that the  devolution of  tenancy rights  shall be  dependent upon  personal   law,  i.e..,   Hindu  Succession  Act.  The

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 19 of 21  

legislature can  also lay down that in certain circumstances there would  be one  kind of  succession  and  in  different circumstances  the   holding  shall   devolve  on  different persons. Devolution  in the  case of  a Bhumidari  under the Uttar Pradesh  Zamindari Abolition  and  Land  Reforms  Act, 1950, is  not affected by Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act as  tenures created  by the Uttar Pradesh did not create proprietary interest  but only  tenancy right.  In Bajaya v. Gopikabai   [(1978) 2  SCC 542],  a Bench of three Judges of this Court held that Bhumiswami and Bhumidari rights are two classes of  tenure-holders of  lands paying  land revenue to the State  and are  governed by  the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act.  The tenancy  rights having  been separately dealt with  by the  Madhya Pradesh  Land Revenue  Code,  the devolution of  the rights  of an  ordinary  tenancy  and  an occupancy tenant  are in accordance with the personal law of the deceased tenant.      Sub-s.2 of  Section 4  of the  Hindu Succession Act, to remove any  doubts, has  declared that  the Act shall not be deemed  to  affect  the  provisions  of  any  law  in  force providing  for   (i)   preventions   of   fragmentation   of agricultural holdings; (ii) for the fixation of ceiling; and (iii) for  the devolution  of tenancy  rights in  respect of such holdings. It is the policy of the legislature that with a  view   to  distribute   the  surplus   land  ceiling   on agricultural land  has been  prescribed so  that the surplus land would  be distributed  to  the  landless  persons  etc. Therefore, the  operation of  such law was excluded from the purview of  the Hindu  Succession Act.  This Court  in  Smt. Soorja v.  SDO, Rehli,  Civil Appeal  No.1180/84 decided  on November 22,  1994, has upheld the ceiling law and held that married daughters  are not  entitled to intestate succession of the father nor a separate holding since the definition of "family" did not include married daughter. The devolution of the tenancy  rights are  governed by Entry 18 to the List II of the Seventh Schedule. Therefore, the Hindu Succession Act to that extent stands excluded. As regards the prevention of fragmentation of  agricultural land, it is already held that if at  the instance  of  sons  the  agricultural  lands  are divisible and  each son  is entitled  to hold  and enjoy his share separately  daughters also  would  be  entitled  to  a separate share  at a  partition and  enjoyment therein.  The fragmentation in that behalf, therefore, should not stand an impediment  to   the  daughter’s   claiming   an   intestate succession and  to claim  a share in the agricultural lands. The   Hindu   Succession   Act   regulates   succession   of agricultural land  and the  word ’property’ in Sections 6 to 8, 14  and 15  and other  sections in that Act would include agricultural land,  Thus considered  the operation  of  Sub- s.(1) of  Section 4 will have an overriding effect for Hindu female claiming parity with Hindu male for succession to the agricultural lands held by the father, mother, etc. and sub- s.(2) does  not stand  an impediment  for such  a  right  of devolution.      The reason  assigned by  the State  level committee  is that permitting  succession to the female would fragment the holding and  in the case of inter-caste marriage or marriage outside the  tribe, the non-tribals or outsiders would enter into their  community to  take away their lands. There is no prohibition for  a son  to claim  partition and  to take his share of  the property at the partition. If fragmentation at his   instance   is   permissible   under   law,   why   the daughter/widow is  denied inheritance  and succession on par with son?  In Kerala  State, the  Hindu Succession Act, 1956 was modified  in relation to its application to the State of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 20 of 21  

Kerala, by amendment of Devasthanam Properties (Admission of Temporary  Management  and  Control  and  Hindu  Succession) (Amendment) Act,  1958  and  of  the  (Kullaiamma  Thumporan Korilakam Society  Partition) Act,  1961. Kerala Hindu Joint Family Abolition  Act, 1975  brought about  change  bringing female into  the fold  for succession  per capita.  Equally, the Hindu  Succession (A.P.  Amendment) Act  13 of 1986, the Andhra Pradesh  Legislature took  lead and amended Section 6 of the Parent Hindu Succession Act and Section 29A conferred on the unmarried daughter the status of co-parcener by birth and has  given her  right to claim partition and equal share along with the sons. In the event of sale by the daughter of the property  obtained at  the petition  Section, 29C  gives right to  male heirs  to purchase the property on payment of the consideration.  In the  event  of  disagreement  on  the consideration the  Court having  the jurisdiction  is  given power to  determine such consideration. In the event of non- payment by  male heirs,  the right  has been  given  to  the female heir to sell the Property to outsiders. Karnataka and Maharashtra legislatures have followed the suit and suitably amended the Hindu Succession Act, 1950.      Throughout  the  country,  the  respective  State  laws prohibit sale  of all  lands in tribal areas to non-tribals, restoration thereof  to the  tribals in case of violation of law and permission of the competent authority for alienation is a  must and mandatory and non-compliance renders the sale void. The  Acts referred to hereinbefore prevailing in Bihar State expressly  prohibit the  sale  of  the  lands  by  the tribals to  the non-tribals  and also  direct resturation or recompensation  by   equivalent  lands   to   the   tribals. Therefore, if  the female  heirs intend  to  alienate  their lands to  non-tribals, the  Acts would operate as a check on their action. In  the event of any need for alienation, by a tribal female,  it would be only subject to the operation of these laws  and the  first offer  should  be  given  to  the brothers or  agnates. In  the  event  of  their  refusal  or unwillingness sale  would   be made to other tribals. In the event of a disagreement on consideration, the civil court of original jurisdiction  should determine the same which would be  binding   in  the  partition.  In  the  event  of  their unwillingness  to   purchase  the   same,  subject   to  the permission of  the competent officer, female tribal may sell the  land   to  tribals   or  non-tribals.   Therefore,  the apprehension  expressed  by  the  State-level  committee  is unfounded.      The Christians  in India  are governed  by  the  Indian Succession Act,  1925. It  is stated  that by  operation  of Section 1  notification issued under the Government of India Act of  1935, the  operation thereof  stood excluded  to the tribal Christians  residing in  the State of Bihar. There is no such  prohibition in other States. Even otherwise, though the  principles   of  Indian  Succession  Act  are  strictly inapplicable,   the   general   principles   therein   being consistent with  justice, equity  and good conscience should equally be  applicable to the tribal Christians of the Bihar State.      I would  hold that  the provisions  of 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 succeed to  the estate of their parent, brother, husband, as heirs by  intestate succession and inherit the property with equal share  with male  heir with absolute rights as per the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 21 of 21  

general principles of Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as amended and interpreted  by this  Court and  equally of  the  Indian Succession Act  to tribal  Christian. However,  the right of alienation will  be subject  to the relevant provisions like the Act, the Bihar Scheduled Areas Regulation 1969, Santhals tAmendmet)   Act,    1958,    Santhal    Pargaras    tenancy (Supplementary Provisions) Act, 1949 as amended from time to time etc.  They would  be applicable  to them and subject to the conditions  mentioned therein.  In case the tribal woman intends  to   alienate  the   land,  subject   to  obtaining appropriate permission  from the  competent authority  under the appropriate  Act, she  should first  offer the  land for sale to  the brother  or in  his absence  to any male lenial descendant of  the family  and the  sale will be in terms of mutually agreed  consideration and  other terms etc. In case of any  disagreement  on  consideration,  the  consideration shall be  determined on an application filed by either party before the  competent civil  court of  original jurisdiction over the area in which the land is situated and the decision of  the   civil  court   after  adduction  of  evidence  and consideration thereof,  shall be  final and  binding on  the parties. In  case the  brother or  lenial descendant  is not willing to purchase either by mutual agreement or as per the price settled  by the  civil court,  the female tribal woman shall be entitled to alienate the land to the non-tribal but subject to the provisions of the appropriate Act.      The writ  petitions are  accordingly allowed  and  rule nisi is  made absolute.  The interim direction given for the protection of  the petitioner  Nos.2 and 3 in the first writ petition would  continue until  they  voluntarily  seek  its withdrawal or  modification in  writing made to the District Superintendent of  Police and  an order  in that  behalf  is passed and communicated to them.      In the  circumstances, parties  are  directed  to  bear their own costs.