By Admin 
The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of a widow, saying that she is entitled to claim maintenance from her father-in-law’s property, even if she became a widow after her father-in-law’s death. While giving the verdict, the Supreme Court referred to Manusmriti and said that even today the idea behind the law of maintenance is that the heirs of the property of the dependents of the deceased will take care of them.
Referring to verse number 389 of Chapter 8 of Manusmriti, the bench of Justice Pankaj Mittal and Justice SVN Bhati reminded the in-laws of their responsibilities towards the woman. The court said, ‘No mother, no father, no wife or no son deserves to be abandoned. If anyone abandons these people, the king should impose a fine of 600 (units) on him. This verse emphasizes on the support of female members by the head of the family.
This case is of a widow woman, whose husband died after the death of her father-in-law. The Family Court rejected her claim on her father-in-law’s property on the grounds that she was not a widow at the time of his death. The woman challenged this decision in the High Court and the High Court sent the case back to the Family Court asking it to decide the compensation amount for her.
The woman’s husband had three brothers and the wife of the second brother filed a petition in the Supreme Court against the High Court order and said that the matter of maintenance was not worth hearing. Another petition was also filed against the compensation. This petition is of a woman named Uma Devi, who claims that she was in a live-in relationship with the widowed woman’s father-in-law for a long time, hence the widowed woman has no right on the property.
Considering both the appeals, the Supreme Court said that the widow woman has filed a petition in the Family Court under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act (HAMA) and Section 21 of Chapter 3 of HAMA states who is a dependent. The court said that it also talks about the right of a widow to maintenance from her father-in-law’s property, it does not say that it does not matter whether her husband died earlier or later. The widowed daughter-in-law is dependent and is entitled to maintenance from her father-in-law’s property.
The court said that it cannot interfere with what is written in the law and refusing to provide maintenance to the woman is a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution, which talks about the right to life. If maintenance is not provided then the woman will become a victim of poverty.
Also read:-
Hyderabad Communal Tensions: Communal tension in Hyderabad at midnight, violence broke out after rumors, police had to resort to lathicharge