What Is Wajib ul Urj? Law Forcing Women To Suffer In Name Of Culture

Ahead of President Draupadi Murmu's three-day visit to Himachal Pradesh from 18 to 21 April, women activists from the state have sought an appointment with President to apprise her about tribal women's property rights. They believe President being a tribal woman would know their plight. 

Women's core issues remain the same, irrespective of religion, ethnicity, or culture. Tribal women also have to face sexist laws of the community and suffer in the name of culture. Tribal women from Kinnaur are opposing Wajib ul Urj, which means customary rights. In other words, it means women are not entitled to their father's property. How long women will be deprived of their property rights is an unanswered question. 

What is Wajib ul Urj?

Wajib ul Urj is 93-year-old customary law that came into existence in 1926 and still practiced in Himachal Pradesh’s tribal districts. Despite laws like the Hindu Succession Act, of 1956 that stands for equal rights for men and women into existence, women are suffering due to cultural rules like Wajib ul Urj. How Wajib ul Urj discriminate? Women do not get any property rights, in the case of the father having no son, the property gets transferred to male members of the family, be the uncles or cousins. According to a report, these women feel men from the community are not in favour of them getting property rights. It is also discriminatory as sons in the family get all property divided among them. Meaning- Jashthang and Konchang are local customs ensuring the property is divided only between male heirs. Jashthang is the rights of the elder son, who will get the best of the property and Konchang is the rights of a younger son, who gets the ancestral house. Again, if the patriarch dies without a male heir, the property gets transferred to an unwed daughter, who is neither allowed to sell nor gift the property. If she gets married, the property is transferred to a paternal male heir. The moral of the story is land should stay in the clan and be owned by men only. This is sexist and discriminatory at the same time and has impacted women adversely. 

In a report by Saurabh Chauhan, women activists claimed - It is unfair to women, for instance, a widow who has no support and no rights on her father’s property, imagine her life without financial assistance. One of the arguments says, the land should not be transferred to non-tribals, which is why women are denied ownership. The question is should women be left to suffer for preserving land? Isn't it problematic? There is another cultural rule bitho-pono, in a research paper titled, Customary laws: a study of Kinnuar, bitho-pono is described as a legally binding custom in which a separate house or room is given to a woman by the bridegroom’s parents. A woman can have ownership even after husband’s death or if he abandons her. However, no such arrangements were to acquire paternal property. Besides, if women’s rights are protected by cultural rules, one shouldn't oppose the Hindu Succession Act, of 1956. 

Legal battle

Women challenged Wajib ul Urj for depriving them of equal rights in the family property. The first appeal was made in October 2002 in Himachal Pradesh High Court (HC). The judge ruled in favour of the daughters who filed the case. The court granted them property rights but the son challenged the judgement in the state’s high court in 2003. In 2015, Justice Rajiv Sharma upheld the district court’s order in favour of the daughters. He ruled- The daughters in the tribal areas shall inherit property in accordance with the Hindu Succession Act of 1956 and not as per customs. This is in order to prevent women from facing social injustice and all forms of exploitation." However, the case is still pending after it was challenged in the apex court in February 2016. In 2022, Supreme Court (SC) asked the central government of revising the issue and accordingly decide on amending the law that discriminates against tribal women concerning land rights. 

Suggested Reading: Urban Elitist Views: Centre Opposes Legalising Same-Sex Marriage Again