Ashamed and disgusted by the latest Supreme Court judgment!!
Somewhere down the line I believe that we have reached to the penultimate door to hell…towards a world of hypocrisy where women are still treated as a material good, as something lower than the status of MALE …..
Shame on us …. we went to the ancient ideology and texts which had demeaned women like anything..for example
MANUSMRITI says- “Women are not fit for independence. All women think like whores.’’
RIG VEDA says – “Women are powerless and have no right of inheritance.’’
WHOLE PROCESS OF CHANGES IN LEGISLATION According to United Nation’s Report in of 1980- Half of the world’s population consists of women, almost 2/3rd of the work is done by them but they hold only 1/10th of world’s income and 1/100th of property. Though this report was not at all taken serously am sure because otherwise such decision would not have been passed today by honorable SC of India.
India has been a male oriented country and rights of women have always been neglected. Based on religious beliefs even in 21st century, laws and rights given under it are abusive and are against women. There is complete monopoly of patriarchal society. People still consider daughters as burden and sin of previous lives. They need son because of their conservative thought that he would be the successor of family and would lead them to moksha. The only thing that I want to say being a guy…please understand how criminal this thinking is…c’mon !! This makes me feel embarrassed and many like men like me !!!
The conservative philosophy of people even superseded the legislation and women were not given absolute right over the property instead they were trated like one. The rights given to them were with such conditions which were unfavourable for them. Married women had no right in Joint Family Property. Widow’s right on her deceased husband’s property was forfeited in case of re-marriage. Her intrest in the property was not absolute. She had no right to alienate the property. The position that was given to her by the laws was just of a mere user.
The Constitution of India prohibits discrimination on the ground of sex and guarantees equality for all. Yet women are routinely discriminated in almost every legislation. Women have always been treated as a disadvantageous section of the society. They have lacked power socially, economically and politically
It was not until 2005, 58 years after independence India began recognising Property rights as a serious and systematic issue affecting women. The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005, has been a remarkable step and has acted as a boon for women who suffered because of loopholes in Property laws for such a long period
But only after a decade a major setback came today for many women across the country, the Supreme Court has said that a daughter’s right to ancestral property does not arise if the father died before the amendment to Hindu law came into force in 2005.
The apex court held that amended provisions of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, do not have retrospective effect. The father would have to be alive on 9th of September, 2005, if the daughter were to become a co-sharer with her male siblings.
A bench of Justices Anil R Dave and Adarsh K Goel held that the date of a daughter becoming co-parcener is on and from the commencement of the Act.
On September 9, 2005 the landmark amendment to TheHindu Succession Act of 1956, which originally denied women the right to inherit ancestral property ruled that a Hindu woman or a girl will have equal property rights along with her male relatives for any partition made in ancestral property.
Earlier, women could only ask for sustenance from a joint Hindu family. The only restriction in force after the passage of this amendment was that women could not ask for a share if the property had been alienated or partitioned before December 20, 2004, the date the Bill was introduced. But now the Supreme Court has added this new restriction.
We should demand an explanation for this logic? What is the intelligable differentia principle SC has used to go against the principle of equality? Being a guy I request every other guys to refuse to take the entire share if they were given under this most unfortunate restriction !!!!!
To achieve equality in real terms we need to remove discrepancies in laws which are biased towards males. We should stop the legislators from making such laws which are discriminatory. Even after the amendment still the defects exists. The sole objective of this Act to strengthen women by giving them rights in property and to make them self-sufficient. Just making the laws or Amendments in laws is not enough, if there is not proper execution of those laws.
In one side we are talking about upliftment of women in the society and making them self-sufficient and at the next step we are struggling with rising number of dowry death cases. That is a curse for our nation. There is no doubt that the amendment has a wide scope and it is kind of boon for women because by providing them rights in property and claim for partition in dwelling home has made them economically and socially strong. But amendment just can’t be beneficial by itself, if women will not use it.
For that women need to be made aware for their rights. So, they can utilise these rights to the maximum extent. We should come should come forward for it and take a lead in the movement to make women aware of their rights. The media should help in it.
In fact I don’t believe in the word WOMEN EQUALITY because one immediate question comes to my mind is EQUAL TO WHOM?? I don’t want to recognise this hierarchy..Iwant WOMEN EMPOWERMENT instead !!
My respect, love & support for our existence which is not possible without Women…our source of power, energy and life !!!