Property rights in Bangladesh are primarily governed by personal laws. However, in reality, women’s property rights remain very limited, and many women are deprived of the rights to which they are legally entitled. Women also face significant difficulties in securing matrimonial rights, such as maintenance and dower, and often do not receive alimony following divorce. At times, many women even voluntarily relinquish their inheritance to preserve family unity. National estimates indicate that women constitute a mere 4 percent of registered landowners; this not only leaves many women in economically precarious situations (particularly in the post-divorce period) but also reinforces patriarchal gender disparities. Disturbingly, this economic insecurity often compels women to remain even in abusive marriages.
Under family laws, for instance, Muslim inheritance law, daughters inherit half the share given to sons, whereas under Hindu law, women receive only limited ownership. In the current legal system, recognising the “constructive trust” principle within Bangladesh’s family law regime would secure women’s equitable interests in matrimonial property. This principle allows courts to acknowledge a wife’s contributions—whether financial or domestic—and grant her a fair beneficial interest in matrimonial property, even if the property is legally registered only in the husband’s name.
Joint marital property rights may include women’s right to own, access, control, dispose of, transfer, and receive a share of income from business and property, such as jointly cultivated land. These rights may also cover property and income to which women contribute through farming, fishing, and resource management.
During marriage, property acquired by both spouses through their contributions can be considered matrimonial property. This excludes assets either spouse owned before marriage or received individually through inheritance or gifts. These rights apply regardless of which spouse was responsible for the divorce.
Several Muslim-majority jurisdictions have recognised rights of women in matrimonial property. Malaysia, for instance, acknowledges such rights through the Islamic customary policy of harta sepencarian (joint property). Under Malaysia’s Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) Act 1984, when a couple divorces, the court may divide or sell marital assets acquired jointly by the spouses. Brunei’s Islamic Family Law Act 2000 also recognises the matrimonial property right. Indonesia acknowledges joint ownership of property acquired during marriage except for gifts and inheritances. The Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA) of Singapore empowers the court to order the division of property upon divorce or annulment during matrimonial proceedings. Turkish Civil Code provides that, unless the spouses agree otherwise, property gained during the marriage is shared between them when the marriage ends. Trans-jurisdictional recognition of matrimonial property rights shows that it is not inconsistent with religious legal traditions; rather, these laws may coexist with them.
A closely related issue has surfaced in Bangladeshi jurisprudence. In the Hefzur Rahman case, the High Court Division advocated for granting wife maintenance till death or remarriage. However, the Appellate Division subsequently departed from the High Court’s stand and post-divorce maintenance is currently confined to the iddat, which is the waiting period. As per Muslim law, iddat is three menstrual cycles or three lunar months for a divorced woman, and until the birth of the child for a pregnant woman. So, this case neither directly examined nor conclusively determined the question of matrimonial property distribution.
However, our constitution allows for judicial innovation where existing legal frameworks fail to adequately protect vulnerable parties’ rights. It is included in Article 44 and Article 102. Moreover, for ensuring complete justice, Article 104 empowers the Appellate Division to issue such directions, orders, decrees, or writs as may be necessary. Besides, Article 27 of the constitution mandates equality before the law. Article 28(2), in addition, specifically ensures equality between women and men.
Moreover, Section 94 of the Trusts Act, 1882 says that if someone holds property but is not entitled to all of its benefits, they must use or transfer it in a way that protects the rights of the person who is actually entitled to it. Although this section does not specifically deal with property owned by married couples, its principle might be supportive for establishing the constructive trust claim where one spouse has contributed to property acquired during the marriage.
Finally, the proverb, ‘‘Behind every successful man stands a woman,’’ romanticises the patriarchal ideal where women are expected to invisibly facilitate men’s success, wealth accumulation, and property ownership without being recognised as equal stakeholders in that wealth. In Bangladesh, women make indispensable yet largely unpaid contributions through domestic labour, childcare, and household management, often sacrificing their careers and financial independence to sustain the family. Bearing in mind that marriage is a reciprocal social institution founded on mutual obligations and shared endeavour, such contributions strongly warrant equitable recognition of matrimonial property rights. So when it comes to establishing gender equality, it cannot be achieved by women alone; rather, it requires a paradigm shift where men actively participate as allies.
Jeba Mobashwira is an intern at the Law Desk of The Daily Star and an advocate at the District and Sessions Judge Court in Dhaka.
Views expressed in this article are the author's own.
Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentaries, and analyses by experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, see our guidelines for submission.
