Ruling on the court setting a limit on mahr and people going against it

This questioner from Yemen says: In our country, there is a court regulation that the mahr must not exceed two thousand riyals. This has been made general, but the guardians and the suitors agree among themselves to pay amounts that may exceed sixty thousand riyals. The girl's guardian conditions the husband not to inform the court of this. If the court asks, they say: "The mahr is only two thousand riyals." If the court or the state were to know, one of them would go to prison. If they continue in the marriage and things go well, there is no problem. But the problem arises if they differ and the girl returns to her family, and her husband comes to take her. Her family says to him: "Divorce her." If he wants to divorce her and asks for the money they have, they say: "You did not pay us more than two thousand riyals." He cannot complain, lest he be imprisoned, because he is concealing it. What should he do in this situation? Is it permissible for him, if these people have eaten his money, to burn their farm or burn something of theirs in retaliation or to harass them? And is it permissible for us to boycott this guardian who ate this husband's money, to leave off greeting him, and to boycott him, perhaps so that Allah will guide him? Or what?
Answer: The obligatory thing in this case, when there is a dispute, is to return to the court, even if imprisonment or other consequences have occurred. It is obligatory to return to the court so that it can look into the matter and reunite the husband and wife by the means the court deems appropriate. Perhaps Allah will make it a cause of guidance. All of this is after making an effort, after interposing good men between you and the wife's family, perhaps so that Allah will guide her and she will return to you, and praise be to Allah. The point is that marrying with more than the limit set between you and the woman's family, if need and dire necessity call for it, is permissible, so that you do not sit without a wife. However, everyone should conduct themselves with proper conduct and accept what the state has designated, and they should cooperate in good. Exaggeration in mahr brings no good; it may harm everyone, and it may prevent young men and young women from marrying. The state wanted good and wanted reform. The people, men and women, should cooperate with the state and be satisfied with this decision, even if it is small. When things improve, he will give her a great deal. But the people should cooperate with the state in accepting what has been decided and being satisfied with it, and be lenient, so that men are not prevented from marrying and women are not prevented from marrying. If it happens that they dispute after that, they should interpose people of good from the neighbors and relatives who can reconcile them and do good by separation with kindness, or by reunion and reconciliation, without reaching the court. If dire necessity calls for the court, there is no barrier to going to the court, even if consequences occur and one is imprisoned or the other is imprisoned. As for his burning his land or farm or transgressing, no, this is not permissible. But he should seek his right through the means of the authorities. We ask Allah for guidance for everyone. Yes.
The presenter: And if he was afraid of prison and remained silent?
The Shaykh: If he is permitted, there is no harm. He will find his matter on the Day of Resurrection; he will take his right on the Day of Resurrection.
The presenter: May Allah reward you.