The economic rights of deserted, separat ed and divorced In dian women are extremely limited in the home.

Though their numbers are steadily growing, they have no right to marital property in India even after many years of marriage, a right recognised for decades in many countries.Thus, on separation or divorce, an Indian wifepartner has no right to the assets and property acquired by the parties during the course of the marriage. Women's non-financial, and sometimes even financial contribution, in building up the home and being the primary caregiver to children and the elderly, is made invisible by the law and not seen as work of any value. If the marriage breaks down, the woman is left property-less and asset-less unless she has bought property in her name.Women's organisations and groups have demanded a law to give all Indian women equal right in marital property regardless of which spouse has paid for it, but this demand has been ignored.

In the meanwhile, Indian women, under various per sonal laws can only approach the court for `maintenance', that is, spousal and child support. Women of all communities are similarly situated as far as this right is concerned.Hindu, Christian, Parsi and women married under the civil law (The Special Marriage Act) can ask for interim and permanent maintenance as an ancillary relief in a petition for divorce, judicial separation or `restitution of conjugal rights'.

There are also common general laws that apply to all religious communities under which maintenance can be claimed. Under S.125 CrPC, all Indian women and children can claim maintenance, barring divorced Muslim women. Under the Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act also, women can claim 'monetary relief' and residence. After the

judgement in the Danial Latifi case, divorced Muslim women can and do claim maintenance under the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights On Divorce) Act.

Women, however, face several obstacles and biases in accessing these rights. The substantive law in certain pro visions reflects the patriarchal bias inherent in large sections of our society. An archaic and discriminatory subsection under S.125 CRPC allows a judge to refuse main tenance if a woman, without “sufficient reason“, refuses to live with her spouse.Under the Hindu Marriage Act and the Divorce Act, the court has been given power to consider the conduct of the parties while making an or der for alimony. This reliance on conduct to defeat a claim for maintenance has been specifically disallowed in countries like Canada. These sections fail to recognize that spousal support has to be given by recognising that a woman, by contributing to house and care work, has suffered economic disadvantage and a loss of ca reer opportunities.

Separated women are enti tled to maintenance, which will enable them to live with the same standard of living that they were used to in their mar ital homes. The courts are sup posed to assess the income and assets of the parties while granting this. While some positive judgements have stip ulated that the quantum of maintenance should be around a third or more of the hus band's income, in reality, most courts often dole out small sums of money that amount to much less. Courts are also re luctant to award maintenance if a woman is working, even if she earns a tenth of the hus band's income. Most courts also take a long time to decide even a claim for interim main tenance. Even after mainte nance is awarded, many wom en have to go to the courts to execute their decrees. These factors point to gender insen sitivity and bias in the courts.

Women, particularly poor women, have no resources to fight these cases and access the court and often settle the case on disadvantageous terms or simply aban don them.

A 2013-IDRC study of about 400 separat ed and divorced wom en showed that a ma jority of these women (63%) live with and are de pendent on their natal fami lies. Their problems are com pounded as 85% of these women have children with them. They mostly live in mis erable financial conditions, though almost all contributed in the marital home by doing most of the housework.

In the area of family laws it is critical that women should be recognised as equal partners and should be subject to gender-just and equal laws. A

cannot guarantee this, as uniformity by itself may just give women uniform discriminatory laws.Many women's organisations have thus emphasised that all personal laws need to give equal rights to women. India has had a rich history of plural and specific common laws like the Dowry Prohibition Act, The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, etc, which have sought to enlarge the economic rights of women. For the strengthening of laws related to women, we need a government and a judiciary that recognise the historical disadvantages suffered by women, and are committed to women's rights.

The writer is a Delhi-based lawyer and works on women's issues and family law