Context

·       More than a month after the International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples on August 9, the issue of indigenous rights continues to be highly relevant, particularly in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling on July 17, 2025, in Ram Charan & Ors. vs Sukhram & Ors. This judgment declared that excluding daughters from inheriting ancestral property is a violation of the fundamental right to equality. When viewed through the lens of gender equality, the ruling highlights a profound injustice: the majority of tribal women are denied statutory inheritance rights, with only a few matrilineal communities in the Northeast being exceptions. This pivotal moment signals a clear need for legal reform to guarantee equal property rights for tribal women.

·       Against this backdrop, this article underscores the pressing necessity to confront gender inequality in tribal property rights. It examines recent judicial decisions, the role of customary laws, and advocates for the enactment of a dedicated Tribal Succession Act to safeguard women’s inheritance rights.

Demand for Equal Share in Tribal Property

·       In the case of Ram Charan & Ors. vs Sukhram & Ors., the appellant-plaintiffs—who were the legal heirs of Dhaiya, a Scheduled Tribe woman from Sarguja, Chhattisgarh—sought the division of property inherited from their maternal grandfather, Bhajju Gond. Dhaiya, one of six siblings including five brothers, was denied her rightful share because tribal customs traditionally exclude women from ancestral property claims.

·       Initially, both the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court dismissed their petition, rejecting the argument that Hindu traditions or the Hindu Succession Act should apply due to insufficient evidence. However, the Chhattisgarh High Court ruled in favor of Dhaiya’s heirs, awarding them an equal share. The Court held that customs denying women inheritance rights are discriminatory and perpetuate gender inequality. It stressed that such customs must be eradicated through legal intervention.

·       This decision marked a significant departure from the 1996 Supreme Court case Madhu Kishwar vs State of Bihar, in which the Court acknowledged the gender disparities present in tribal inheritance customs but refrained from invalidating them, citing concerns over potential legal disorder.

Customary Laws and Tribal Women’s Land Rights

·       In the Scheduled Five Area States—such as Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, and Odisha—tribal communities adhere to customary laws that govern marriage, succession, and adoption. Despite women’s substantial contributions to agricultural labor, these customs frequently deny them rights to inherit ancestral land.

·       According to data from the Agriculture Census 2015-16, only about 7% of Scheduled Tribe women own land, compared to 83.3% of men. Arguments opposing women’s inheritance rights often revolve around the notion that tribal land is communally owned or concerns about land alienation when women marry outside the tribe. However, evidence suggests that revenues generated from land sales seldom benefit the gram sabha, weakening these claims.

·       Judicial bodies have emphasized that customs must satisfy stringent criteria—including antiquity, certainty, continuity, reasonableness, and consistency with public policy—to be considered valid. A noteworthy judgment in 2022 by the Jharkhand High Court in Prabha Minz vs Martha Ekka upheld inheritance rights for Oraon women after the community failed to prove a continuous custom excluding daughters from property rights.

The Case for a Separate Tribal Succession Act

·       In a progressive move, the Supreme Court in Kamala Neti (Dead) Thr. Lrs. vs Special Land Acquisition Officer (December 2022) advanced the cause of gender parity concerning tribal women’s property rights. Given that Section 2(2) of the Hindu Succession Act, 2005, explicitly excludes tribal communities, there is a compelling need for a specific Tribal Succession Act to fill this legislative void.

·       The codification of tribal succession laws, akin to those existing for Hindu and Christian communities, would bring much-needed clarity, curtail gender-based discrimination, and grant tribal women statutory inheritance rights. Such a law would be a decisive step toward enhancing equality and justice for indigenous women.

Conclusion

Achieving equal property rights for tribal women necessitates the codification of succession laws, reform of discriminatory customary practices, and adoption of legal frameworks that uphold justice, equality, and inclusive growth. This multifaceted approach is essential to dismantle entrenched gender biases and empower tribal women to claim their rightful inheritance.