ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday stressed that society must strive to abandon regressive dowry practices and instead, promote a model of marriage rooted in simplicity, mutual dignity, and the groom`s financial responsibility through `Mehr`.

`Dowry, unless given voluntarily and free from coercion or social pressure, perpetuatesinequality and exploitation, running contrary to the ideals of an equitable marriage enshrined in both constitutional and Islamic frameworks, observed Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah while heading a twojudge bench.

The bench had taken up an appeal by Muhammad Sajid against an Oct 17, 2022, Lahore High Court (LHC) order.

The seven-page order explained that the present ruling must serve as a firm reminder that any property received by the bride remains exclusively hers and is not subject to claim or appropriation by the groom or his family.

`No misplaced expectations or entitlements should arise in this regard,` emphasised Justice Shah, adding that as a matter of policy, any gift or contribution made by the bride`sfamily should be entirely voluntary and given without societal pressure.

This would preserve familial dignity and reaffirm the constitutional commitment to equality and human dignity, Justice Shah said.

Dowry, if given out of social pressures, can exert a severe burden on families, especially those with limited financial resources, the Supreme Court observed.

In contrast, Islam designates Mehr as the sole obligatory provision, an unconditional gift from the groom to the bride, intending to secure her financial autonomy without burdening her family.

The controversy at hand revolved around the marriage between Muhammad Sajid (petitioner) and Shamsa Asghar (respondent), whichwas solemnised on Feb 5, 2018.

However, the relationship between the parties became strained, ultimately culminating in a divorce.

The respondent instituted a suit for recovery of maintenance allowance and dowry before a trial court. The suit was partially decreed to the extent of dowry and maintenance through a judgement on March 10, 2022.

Both parties file appeals Aggrieved by the quantum of the decree, both parties filed appeals before an additional district judge in Sialkot. The petitioner filed an appeal for reduction of the maintenance allowance while the respondent filed an appeal for increasing the quantum of dowry specified in the decree.

The appeals were partiallyallowed and, more importantly, the valuation of dowry was raised while the claim for maintenance was dismissed on Sept 19, 2022. Subsequently, the petitioner preferred a civil revision before the LHC, but the appeal was dismissed on Oct 17.

In the appeal filed before the Supreme Court by Muhammad Sajid, the primary legal question was whether the dowry claimed by the bride includes presents given to the groom or his family.

At the time of the marriage, the bride`s parents had provided her with dowry.

The Supreme Court, while noting that the list provided by the respondent (bride) shows that certain items given to the groom`s family fall outside the scope of dowry and pass as presents, set aside the LHC judgement.allowed and, more importantly, the valuation of dowry was raised while the claim for maintenance was dismissed on Sept 19, 2022. Subsequently, the petitioner preferred a civil revision before the LHC, but the appeal was dismissed on Oct 17.

In the appeal filed before the Supreme Court by Muhammad Sajid, the primary legal question was whether the dowry claimed by the bride includes presents given to the groom or his family.

At the time of the marriage, the bride`s parents had provided her with dowry.

The Supreme Court, while noting that the list provided by the respondent (bride) shows that certain items given to the groom`s family fall outside the scope of dowry and pass as presents, set aside the LHC judgement.