Supreme Court defines ownership rights over bride's jewellery, wedding gifts

ISLAMABAD, June 29: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has ruled that jewellery given to a bride at her wedding is her exclusive and personal property, and no one else can claim it.

Pakistan’s apex court said a husband, mother-in-law, father-in-law or any other in-laws have no legal right over a bride’s jewellery. Gold or other items given to the bride by parents, relatives or friends will also be treated as her sole property.

Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi headed the three-member bench that delivered the verdict. Justices Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Shakeel Ahmed were also on the bench.

The court said forcibly withholding a bride’s jewellery or gifts amounts to an illegal deprivation of property rights. A husband or other in-laws cannot take possession of or use a bride’s jewellery without her consent, the judgment added.

The Supreme Court said ownership of any gift given at a wedding will be decided by the intent behind it — the purpose for which it was given.

A woman can approach a Family Court to recover her jewellery, dowry and other personal belongings, the court noted. Family Courts have jurisdiction to hear cases seeking the return of a woman’s jewellery, dowry and personal items.

Also Read: SC signals landmark verdict in patricide clemency case

The apex court dismissed the husband’s appeal in the case and upheld the Lahore High Court’s decision.

The Supreme Court’s ruling comes days after the Federal Constitutional Court of Pakistan issued a landmark verdict in an inheritance dispute involving land in Punjab’s Wazirabad.

The FCC headed by Chief Justice Aminuddin Khan and comprising Justice Ali Baqar Najafi issued an important ruling in CPLA No. 3378 of 2022 concerning inheritance rights in a land settlement case from Mouza Dhanunkal, Tehsil Wazirabad.

The case centred on longstanding irregularities in revenue records, where the pre-deceased daughter, Sardar Begum, was not included in official inheritance documentation. As a result, she was deprived of her legal share, and her heirs were denied their rightful entitlement for decades.