New Delhi, Nov. 20: The Supreme Court today ruled that a wife is entitled to the return of her streedhan from an estranged husband under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, even if there is a decree of judicial separation.

Streedhan comprises gifts and valuables received by a woman from her family at the time of marriage. A bench of Justices Dipak Misra and P.C. Pant said streedhan is her "absolute property with all rights to dispose (them of) at her own pleasure", upholding a Tripura woman's appeal for return of such items from her separated husband.

The judges said women not only had the right to file a civil case under the 2005 act for recovery of streedhan, but also to lodge criminal cases for breach of trust which may be punishable with up to three years in jail under the IPC.

"There can be no dispute that a wife can file a suit for realisation of the streedhan but it does not debar her to lodge a criminal complaint for criminal breach of trust. In the 2005 Act, the definition of 'aggrieved person' clearly postulates the status of any woman who has been subjected to domestic violence. 'Economic abuse', as defined in the act, has a large canvass."

Under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, a decree for judicial separation permits couples to live apart, with no obligations for either party to cohabit with the other. Mutual rights and obligations arising out of marriage are suspended.

The decree however, does not sever or dissolve the marriage. It affords an opportunity for reconciliation and adjustment. Judicial separation after a certain period may become a ground for divorce, for instance after a minimum period of a year.

In the present case, Tripura's Krishna Bhattacharjee and her husband Sarathi Choudhury obtained a decree of judicial separation in May 2010. Later, the wife filed a plea for recovery of streedhan from her estranged husband's household.

A magistrate rejected her plea on the ground that she had ceased to be an "aggrieved person", as did a sessions court. Tripura High Court also dismissed her plea, following which she appealed in the apex court.

The top court took a different view. "...as long as the status of the aggrieved person remains and streedhan remains in the custody of the husband, the wife can always put forth her claim. ...the status between the parties is not severed because of the decree of dissolution of marriage... Neither the husband nor any other family members can have any right over the streedhan and they remain the custodians," Justice Misra, writing the judgment, said.

The judge chided the lower courts for dismissing the woman's pleas without examining the issue from a proper perspective.

The bench then cited the 1997 apex court ruling in a similar matter. "He (the husband) has no control over her streedhan. The husband may use it during the time of his distress but nonetheless he has a moral obligation to restore the same or its value to his wife. Therefore, streedhan does not become a joint property and the husband has no title or independent dominion over the property as owner."