Authored By: Sambrita Bose
Cardiff University UK
Introduction
The issue of transmitting ancestral property to daughters has been a subject of intense societal debate in Bangladesh for decades. Although contemporary constitutional discourse affirms equality, Hindu women continue to face materially unequal inheritance rules and deeply entrenched patriarchal practices.[1] Women are often treated as economic dependents and may be expected, after marriage, to relinquish claims connected with their paternal household.[2] A widow may inherit from her deceased husband under the Hindu Women’s Rights to Property Act 1937. Still, her interest has traditionally been characterised as a limited estate rather than absolute ownership.[3] This article challenges that unequal legal position. By examining the governing doctrines, the statutory framework, comparative developments in India and Bangladesh’s international commitments, it argues for legislative reform that secures equal property and inheritance rights for Hindu women.[4] The article first outlines the Dayabhaga and Mitakshara schools, then assesses the constitutional and statutory framework, identifies social and institutional barriers, and concludes with reform proposals.
The Legal Doctrines: Dayabhaga and Mitakshara
Hindu inheritance law has traditionally been discussed through two principal schools: Dayabhaga and Mitakshara.[5] The Bengal region, i.e. Bangladesh, West Bengal and Assam, follow the Dayabhaga doctrine.[6] The Mitakshara doctrine is followed by other regions of India.[7] These schools developed through classical Hindu juristic treatises and commentaries drawing upon Dharmashastra sources; they were not simply created by the Samhitas.[8] Under the traditional Dayabhaga rules applied in Bangladesh, a daughter does not ordinarily inherit alongside a surviving son and therefore lacks an equal share in her father’s estate[9][10]. By contrast, a Hindu widow may inherit a share in her deceased husband’s estate under the Hindu Women’s Rights to Property Act 1937, although the nature of that interest has traditionally been limited.[11]
III. Hindu Laws in Bangladesh and India
The Constitutional Framework and Statutory Protection in Bangladesh
Before examining Hindu inheritance law in Bangladesh, it is necessary to consider the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh. Article 19(3), which forms part of the Fundamental Principles of State Policy, provides that: “The State shall endeavour to ensure equality of opportunity and participation of women in all spheres of national life.” Articles 27 and 28 more directly affirm equality before the law, equal protection of the law and protection against State discrimination on grounds including sex. These provisions establish an important constitutional framework, although their application to religious personal law raises complex questions. Historically, the first significant legislative reform concerning Hindu widows’ property rights was introduced through the Hindu Women’s Rights to Property Act 1937, enacted before the partition of the Indian subcontinent. Section 3(1) of the Act provides that:
“…When a Hindu governed by the Dayabhaga School of Hindu Law dies intestate leaving any property, and when a Hindu governed by any other school of Hindu Law or by customary law dies intestate leaving separate property, his widow, or if there is more than one widow all his widows together, shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), be entitled in respect of property in respect of which he dies intestate to the same share as a son:
Provided that the widow of a predeceased son shall inherit in like manner as a son if there is no son surviving of such predeceased son, and shall inherit in like manner as a son’s son if there is surviving a son or son’s son of such predeceased son:
Provided further that the same provision shall apply mutatis mutandis to the widow of a predeceased son of a predeceased son.”[12]
Modern Judicial and Legislative Developments
This provision gives a Hindu widow a statutory share in qualifying intestate property of her deceased husband.[13] However, section 3(3) traditionally treats the interest inherited by a widow as a Hindu woman’s limited estate; consequently, a share equivalent in quantity to that of a son does not necessarily confer the same quality of absolute ownership. The Act also did not create equal inheritance rights for daughters. It therefore provided an important but incomplete reform and left a substantial distinction between widows, daughters and male heirs.
Comparative Perspective: The Indian Context
India introduced equal coparcenary rights for daughters through the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005, which amended section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act 1956.[14][15][16] A daughter of a Mitakshara coparcener becomes a coparcener by birth in the same manner as a son, with the same rights and liabilities; the right is not dependent on whether she is married or unmarried. Subsequent Supreme Court decisions, including Danamma @ Suman Surpur v Amar, considered the operation of the amended provision.[17] Bangladesh has not enacted a comparable statutory equalisation of daughters’ inheritance rights.[18] Under the Hindu Women’s Rights to Property Act 1937, a widow’s inherited interest has traditionally been limited rather than absolute.[19] The Hindu Women’s Rights to Property (Extension to Agricultural Land) Act 1943 addressed the application of the statutory scheme to agricultural land,[20] and in Jyotindra Nath Mondal v Gouri Dasi the High Court Division recognised a Hindu widow’s entitlement in both agricultural and non-agricultural property left by her husband. [21]
Social, Cultural, and Constitutional Challenges
Legislative Hurdles and Socio-Cultural Resistance
Legal reform efforts in Bangladesh to grant Hindu women equal property rights have encountered significant hurdles. A 2012 Law Commission proposal containing nine principal recommendations was reportedly stalled after opposition from conservative Hindu scholars, and a further 17-section draft was proposed by the Hindu Ain Pronoyoney Nagorik Udyog alliance in 2020.[22] Opponents of reform have argued that Bangladesh’s social and political context differs from that of India and Nepal and have expressed concerns rather than established empirical conclusions that granting inheritance could disrupt family property distribution, elevate dowry demands, hurt marriage prospects, and escalate domestic violence.[23] Nevertheless, despite historical progress, such as the recognition of Stridhana (marriage gifts) and a landmark High Court ruling in Jyotindra Nath Mandal v Gouri Dasi granting widows’ rights to their late husbands’ property women’s inheritance rights have largely eroded since the Vedic era.[24]
Some scholars suggest that women in parts of the Vedic period participated more visibly in religious and intellectual life than in certain later periods.[25][26] However, the extent of that status is historically contested and should not be described as a period in which gender inequality was virtually absent. Later religious and social developments, including texts associated with Manu, are frequently cited as contributing to more restrictive understandings of women’s religious, familial and property roles.[27][28] Whatever the precise historical trajectory, the legally relevant contemporary point is that traditional inheritance rules have operated to deny daughters an equal share in family property.[29]
Constitutional Tension, Awareness, and Customary Barriers
The coexistence of constitutional equality norms and religion-based personal laws creates a continuing legal tension.[30] Rather than intervening directly, courts have generally approached comprehensive reform of personal-law inheritance rules cautiously, and broad changes have largely been treated as matters for legislative policy rather than judicial reconstruction.[31]
Moreover, many Hindu women remain largely unaware of their legal entitlements regarding inheritance, often viewing their exclusion from property rights as an inevitable, traditional norm rather than a denial of rights.[32] Consequently, organised advocacy or collective action from within the community to demand these legal protections has been minimal.[33] Research in rural areas, such as Koil village, indicates that even when women are vaguely aware of their rights to equal inheritance, traditional social structures and customary practices continue to govern their decisions.[34] Ultimately, long-standing customary practices deter most Hindu women from asserting or claiming their legitimate property shares.[35]
In Shishubar Dhali v Chitta Ranjan Mondol, the Appellate Division considered the ownership and succession of stridhana property and recognised the significance of a Hindu woman’s separate property and its transmission through female heirs[36] . The decision should not, however, be presented as establishing a general constitutional right of daughters to equal inheritance. Legislative reform therefore remains necessary. Bangladesh is a party to CEDAW, but it maintains reservations to article 2 and article 16(1)(c); those reservations complicate reliance on the reserved provisions as fully accepted treaty obligations and have themselves attracted sustained criticism. The continuing inequality nevertheless raises serious concerns under the broader anti-discrimination framework of CEDAW and under articles 19, 27 and 28 of the Constitution.[37]
The existing framework governing Hindu inheritance in Bangladesh disadvantages women and can create serious socio-economic vulnerability following the death of a parent or spouse. Under traditional Dayabhaga rules, daughters do not enjoy inheritance rights equal to those of sons and may be excluded where higher-ranking male heirs survive. Widows may inherit, but their interests have traditionally been restricted by the limited-estate doctrine. Testamentary dispositions may provide women with property beyond what the intestate rules would otherwise grant, but a will is not the only circumstance in which a female heir may inherit. The central problem is the unequal rank, extent and quality of women’s rights. Reform is therefore necessary to advance constitutional equality, economic independence and dignity.
Proposals for Reform
Statutory Equalisation of Inheritance Rights
Despite numerous efforts and initiatives over the years, Bangladesh’s Hindu inheritance framework remains materially unequal and insufficiently responsive to contemporary constitutional values[38]. This is particularly disheartening for women who are educated, independent, and eligible, yet continue to lag behind their male counterparts due to structural inequality. It highlights a social structure where male figures are prioritized solely because of their gender, creating a grim prospect for future generations.
The relevant policy question is not whether social tradition should be ignored, but whether tradition can justify unequal legal treatment that deprives daughters of an equivalent share. India’s 2005 reform demonstrates that a neighbouring legal system with a substantial Hindu population can modernise succession law while retaining religious identity.[39] Bangladesh should therefore enact clear legislation granting daughters and sons equal rights in intestate succession and converting inherited interests of women into full ownership.
Societal Re-Education and Allies in Male Relatives
Fathers, husbands, sons, brothers, and other male figures have long been taught that they are the legal and social protectors of their female family members. However, the paradox lies in the fact that the denial of women’s full property rights is historically framed as protection.[40] It is time for men in society to educate themselves and shift from imposing dominance to establishing genuine partnership with women.
Leveraging Female Leadership for Systemic Change
For several decades, Bangladesh has long been led by strong female political leaders across the government and opposition. It is a striking contradiction that in a society where women hold key positions of public power, discriminatory personal laws persist, violating both constitutional guarantees of gender equality and international anti-discrimination commitments.[41] Creating a more inclusive, just, and progressive society where men act as supportive allies rather than dominant figures is essential for the betterment of the nation as a whole.
Conclusion
The contemporary status of Hindu women’s inheritance rights in Bangladesh reveals a continuing gap between constitutional principle and legal practice. Article 19(3) directs the State to promote women’s equality of opportunity and participation, while articles 27 and 28 affirm equality before the law, equal protection and protection against State discrimination on grounds including sex. However, Traditional Dayabhaga rules nevertheless deny daughters an equal place alongside sons. While the limited-estate doctrine restricts the quality of a widow’s ownership. These rules are difficult to reconcile with modern principles of dignity and substantive equality. Bangladesh’s reservations to articles 2 and 16(1)(c) of CEDAW must be acknowledged, but they do not remove the broader need to address discrimination or the strong case for their withdrawal. Comparative reform in India shows that equal inheritance legislation can modernise personal law without erasing religious identity. Bangladesh should therefore enact a comprehensive Hindu succession law granting daughters and sons equal inheritance rights and recognising women’s inherited property as full ownership. Legal reform should be accompanied by public education and institutional support so that formal equality becomes effective in practice.
Référence(S):
Cases
Bangladesh
Jyotindra Nath Mondal v Gouri Dasi (2020) Civil Revision No 2110 of 2004 (HCD)
Shishubar Dhali v Chitta Ranjan Mondol (2022) Civil Appeal No 55 of 2003 (AD)
India
Danamma @ Suman, Surpur & Anr v Amar & Ors (2018) 3 SCC 343
Legislation
Bangladesh
Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh
Hindu Women’s Rights to Property Act 1937
Hindu Women’s Rights to Property (Extension to Agricultural Land) Act 1943
India
Hindu Succession Act 1956
Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005
International Treaties
UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (adopted 18 December 1979, entered into force 3 September 1981) 1249 UNTS 13 (CEDAW)
Books & Institutional Reports
BRAC, BRAC Gender Study 2016 (Report, BRAC 2016)
Journal Articles
Alam MS, ‘Review of Hindu Personal Law in Bangladesh: Search for Reforms’ (2004) 8(1 & 2) Bangladesh Journal of Law 15
Nahar K and others, ‘Hindu Women’s Rights to Inheritance: A Case Study on Bogura Bangladesh’ (2020) 3(6) Sumerianz Journal of Social Science 57
Nayan ND and Das T, ‘Perspectives on the Property Rights of Hindu Women in Bangladesh: An Analysis’ (2023) 2(1) International Journal of Advanced Research & Higher Studies 41
Singh S, ‘Gender Equality and Property Rights of Women’ (2017) 5(2) International Journal of Law and Legal Studies 12
Newspaper & Online Articles
Islam R, ‘We Must Protect Hindu Women’s Right to Inherit Property’ The Daily Star (Dhaka, 9 September 2020)
Islam R, ‘Women’s Inheritance Rights under Hindu Law’ The Daily Star (Dhaka, 15 February 2024)
Jui US and October UMJ, ‘The Law Protects Hindu Widows. But There Are Many Other Factors at Play’ The Business Standard (Dhaka, 14 October 2021) https://www.tbsnews.net/features/panorama/law-protects-hindu-widows-there-are-many-other-factors-play-315613 accessed 1 August 2026
Mogumder AA, ‘Hindu Women’s Right to Inheritance’ The Daily Star (Dhaka, 23 August 2021) https://www.thedailystar.net/law-our-rights/news/hindu-womens-right-inheritance-2159216 accessed 1 August 2026
Staff Correspondent, ‘High Court Ruling: Hindu Widows to Have Right on Husbands’ Land’ The Daily Star (Dhaka, 3 September 2020)
[1] Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, arts 19, 28; Nilay Das Nayan and Tanushri Das, ‘Perspectives on the Property Rights of Hindu Women in Bangladesh: An Analysis’ (2023) 2(1) International Journal of Advanced Research & Higher Studies 41, 41.
[2] Nayan and Das (n 1) 42–44.
[3] Hindu Women’s Rights to Property Act 1937, s 3; Jyotindra Nath Mondal v Gouri Dasi (2020) Civil Revision No 2110 of 2004 (HCD).
[4] UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (adopted 18 December 1979, entered into force 3 September 1981) 1249 UNTS 13 (CEDAW) arts 2, 15.
[5] A Apurba Mogumder, ‘Hindu Women’s Right to Inheritance’ The Daily Star (Dhaka, 23 August 2021) https://www.thedailystar.net/law-our-rights/news/hindu-womens-right-inheritance-2159216 accessed 1 August 2026.
[6] ibid.
[7] ibid.
[8] ibid 2.
[9] ibid.
[10] ibid.
[11] Umme Salma Jui and Umme Mahbuba Jahan October, ‘The Law Protects Hindu Widows. But There Are Many Other Factors at Play’ The Business Standard (Dhaka, 14 October 2021) https://www.tbsnews.net/features/panorama/law-protects-hindu-widows-there-are-many-other-factors-play-315613 accessed 1 August 2026.
[12] Hindu Women’s Rights to Property Act 1937, s 3.
[13] Umme Salma Jui and Umme Mahbuba Jahan October, ‘The Law Protects Hindu Widows. But There Are Many Other Factors at Play’ The Business Standard (Dhaka, 14 October 2021) https://www.tbsnews.net/features/panorama/law-protects-hindu-widows-there-are-many-other-factors-play-315613 accessed 1 August 2026.
[14] Danamma @ Suman, Surpur & Anr v Amar & Ors (2018) 3 SCC 343.
[15] Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005 (India), s 6.
[16] Hindu Succession Act 1956 (India), s 6 (as amended by the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005).
[17] Danamma @ Suman, Surpur & Anr v Amar & Ors (2018) 3 SCC 343.
[18] Rifat Islam, ‘We Must Protect Hindu Women’s Right to Inherit Property’ The Daily Star (Dhaka, 9 September 2020).
[19] Hindu Women’s Rights to Property Act 1937, s 3.
[20] Hindu Women’s Rights to Property (Extension to Agricultural Land) Act 1943.
[21] Jyotindra Nath Mondal v Gouri Dasi (2020) Civil Revision No 2110 of 2004 (High Court Division, Supreme Court of Bangladesh); Staff Correspondent, ‘High Court Ruling: Hindu Widows to Have Right on Husbands’ Land’ The Daily Star (Dhaka, 3 September 2020).
[22] A Apurba Mogumder, ‘Hindu Women’s Right to Inheritance’ The Daily Star (Dhaka, 23 August 2021) https://www.thedailystar.net/law-our-rights/news/hindu-womens-right-inheritance-2159216 accessed 1 August 2026.
[23] Mogumder (n 22).
[24] Jyotindra Nath Mondal v Gouri Dasi (2020) Civil Revision No 2110 of 2004 (High Court Division, Supreme Court of Bangladesh)..
[25] Nilay Das Nayan and Tanushri Das, ‘Perspectives on the Property Rights of Hindu Women in Bangladesh: An Analysis’ (2023) 41, 43.
[26] ibid 43.
[27] ibid 43.
[28] ibid 43.
[29] ibid 43.
[30] BRAC, BRAC Gender Study 2016 (Report, BRAC 2016) 24.
[31] ibid 24.
[32] S Singh, ‘Gender Equality and Property Rights of Women’ (2017) 5(2) International Journal of Law and Legal Studies 12.
[33] MS Alam, ‘Review of Hindu Personal Law in Bangladesh: Search for Reforms’ (2004) 8(1 & 2) Bangladesh Journal of Law 15.
[34] Kamrun Nahar and others, ‘Hindu Women’s Rights to Inheritance: A Case Study on Bogura Bangladesh’ (2020) 3(6) Sumerianz Journal of Social Science 57, 58.
[35] ibid 58.
[36] Shishubar Dhali v Chitta Ranjan Mondol (2022) Civil Appeal No 55 of 2003 (Appellate Division, Supreme Court of Bangladesh); see also Rayhanul Islam, ‘Women’s Inheritance Rights under Hindu Law’ The Daily Star (Dhaka, 15 February 2024).
[37] Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, art 19(3); UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (adopted 18 December 1979, entered into force 3 September 1981) 1249 UNTS 13 (CEDAW); Nayan and Das (n 1) 41, 46.
[38] Hindu Women’s Rights to Property Act 1937; Nilay Das Nayan and Tanushri Das, ‘Perspectives on the Property Rights of Hindu Women in Bangladesh: An Analysis’ (2023) 2(1) International Journal of Advanced Research & Higher Studies 41, 44.
[39] Hindu Succession Act 1956 (India); Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005 (India).
[40] Jyotindra Nath Mondal v Gouri Dasi (2020) Civil Revision No 2110 of 2004 (HCD); Nayan and Das (n 1) 42–44.
[41] Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, art 19(3); UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (adopted 18 December 1979, entered into force 3 September 1981) 1249 UNTS 13 (CEDAW).
