DOWRY AS A SOCIAL EVIL IN INDIAN SOCIETY

ABSTRACT

The practice of dowry persists across socioeconomic classes in India, in which it has been illegal for more than 60 years, leading to serious injustices against women. This article looks at dowry as a breach of women’s fundamental rights as provided by the Indian Constitution, not only as a social evil. The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and some of the provision under Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 – examine the legal system that was safeguarding these rights. The practice of dowry over a long period of time, though prohibited under the Indian law, it continues to inflict the violation of women’s constitutional rights. Finally, the article examines the wider outcomes for law and society while analyzing judicial response through some landmark decisions that interpret dowry-related violations as a constitutional harm.

INTRODUCTION

The Dowry System, it was entrenched a patriarchal society and it involves the transfer of parental property or a valuable assert at the time of marriage. Although, society normalized in many contexts, dowry frequently give rise to harassment, violence against women’s and even a dowry death. In India, after 1961 dowry was considered an illegal and morally wrong after the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and criminalized the giving and taking a dowry from a women family. Yet, the practice was continued. In India society from the beginning of the period, society considered daughters are burden of their families and this not due to their educational or necessities of their live but it is due to their marriage time period. Women faced a lot of discrimination either it would be educational rights, rights to life and dignity, right to work etc. It is also found that if a woman was pregnant then firstly her in-laws test the gender revealing test to find out that whether it’s a girl or boy and if it is found a girl then her in-laws commit a female infanticide or female foeticide, that was also a crime in India. Thus, was a discrimination against a woman from the beginning before they are born or come to this world. Through daily basics crimes are relating women are very horrible such as sexual assault or harassment in workplace, gender discrimination, rape, marital rape, child marriages particularly in rural areas, female foeticide, domestic violence in their house, lack of education due to gender discrimination, not to provide a proper healthcare, dowry death. Now, Dowry has become a prominent cause of mental, physical, and economic abuse against a women or married women. Many men believe that demanding dowry is their right when he entering into marriage and also, they considered as a “gift”, but in reality, they are not gifts — they compared woman into dowry, or they are a heavy burden on woman families particularly those who come from poor economic backgrounds. Due to this many daughters remain unmarried because groom demanded a heavy dowry either it would be a cash, gold, different furniture or property.

In August 2025, an incident was happened in Greater Noida that was a Nikki Bhati Case. Nikki Bhati was married in 2016 and she had reportedly that her family providing a car and gold at the wedding but her in-laws demanded an additional ₹36 lakh in cash. On the incident day her husband and her in-laws was allegedly tortured after that they burnt her. This horrific incident was witnessed by her 6 years old sone and a video recorded by her sister, who married into the same family. However, she died the same day while being transferred from hospital in Greater Noida to Delhi. Police filed a case is being prosecuted under BNS sections 103(1) Murder, 61(2) criminal conspiracies, 115(2) voluntarily causing hurt. 

NCRB DATA 

Recent data from the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) reveals that over 15,000 cases registered under the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and 6,156 cases registered for dowry related death. Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Karnataka reported the highest number of cases across the states.

LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS

The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961

Section 2 -: Definition of Dowry 

Dowry defined as “any property or valuable security” given or agreed to be given either directly or indirectly- By one party to a marriage to the other party to the marriage; or By the parents of either party to a marriage or by any other person, to either party to the marriage or to any other person;

At or before or any time after marriage in connection with marriage of the said parties, but does not include dower or mahr in the caser of persons to whom the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) applies.

Section 3 -: Penalty for giving or taking of Dowry

If any person gives or takes or abets the giving or taking of dowry, he shall be punishable with the imprisonment for the term which shall not be less than five years, and with fine which shall not be less that fifteen thousand rupees or the amount of the values of such dowry.

Provided that the court may, special reasons to be recorded in the judgement, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than five years.

Also, shall apply to, or in relation to, – Presents which are given at the time of a marriage to the bride (without any demand).

Provided that such presents to be either customary in nature or value not excessive to financial status of the person by whom or on whose behalf, such presents are given.

Section 4 -: Penalty for demanding Dowry

If any person demands directly or indirectly, from the parents or other relatives or guardian of a bride or bridegroom, then he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months, but which may extend to two years and with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees.

Provided that the court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgement, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than six months.

Section 4A -: Ban for Advertisement 

It prohibits any form of advertisement (either through in newspaper, journal, media) that offers share of property or money as a consideration for marriage. 

Prints or publish or circulate any advertisement referred in clause (a) Then, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not less than six months, but which may extend to five years, or with fine which may extend to fifteen thousand rupees.

Provided that the court may, for adequate and special reasons to be recorded in this judgement, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than six months.

Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Section 80 -: Dowry Death 

Where the death of women is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs than under natural circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any other relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry.

Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life also.

Section 85 -: Husband or relative of husband of a women subjecting her to cruelty

Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, such women to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall be liable to fine.

Section 86 -: Definition of Cruelty

Any wilful conduct which is of such a nature driving a woman to suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman.

CONTEMPORARY CASE TRENDS

JYOTI CASE

Jyoti, who was married to Sachin in 2018 was found hanging at her matrimonial home in Shanti Colony, South Delhi on January 19, 2024. The post-mortem examination concluded that she had died due to “asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging”.

During cross-examination, Jyoti’s mother and brother testified that the bride’s father had given household items, Rs 1 Lakh, a gold chain and a gold ring during the marriage. However, two years later, Jyoti was allegedly harassed for bringing “less dowry” and subjected to physical and mental cruelty over fresh demands of 5 lakh.

On Jan 1, 2024, Jyoti was allegedly driven out of her matrimonial home and stayed with her parents for more than two weeks. On Jan 18, while she was being taken back to her in-laws’ house, Sachin allegedly assaulted her again. Hours before her death, reportedly Jyoti called her mother and complained of further physical assault. She was found hanging later that day.

The court noted that the allegations were consistent and withstood cross-examination, and that there was “clean corroboration” among the testimonies of the three key prosecution witnesses. It held that Sachin attracted the statutory presumption under Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, which relates to dowry death. However, it found insufficient evidence to attribute a role in the “immediate” cruelty before Jyoti’s death to Sachin’s parents and confined their conviction to Section 498A.

Rejecting the defence claim that family members were “interested witnesses”, the court said dowry-related crimes usually occur within the confines of matrimonial homes, making independent witnesses unlikely.

A Delhi High Court has sentenced a man to seven years for rigorous imprisonment for dowry death, holding that the prosecution had successfully established all the essential ingredients of Section 304B IPC (Section 80 BNS) and discharged the “intial onus” required to raise the statutory presumption against the accused.

Previously, the Additional Sessions Judge of trail court observed that two incidents of beating inflicted on the deceased in 2024 were “proximate to the time of her death” and formed part of a continuing pattern of cruelty linked to dowry demands. The Court said, the prosecution had placed “clear, cogent and reliable evidence” on record to show that the deceased was subjected to harassment for dowry, which ultimately drove her to take her life.

Along with seven years’ imprisonment for the offence of dowry, the court also sentenced the convict and his parents to 15 months simple imprisonment each under section 498A IPC (Section 85 BNS) for subjecting to cruelty. A fine of Rs. 5,000 each was imposed

KAJAL CHAUDHARY CASE

Kajal Chaudhary, 27 years, a SWAT Commando with Delhi Police’s Special Cell and four months pregnant, died on January 27, 2025 in Ghaziabad hospital, five days after being attacked by her husband, Ankur, a clerk with the Ministry of Defence.

Kajal’s father claimed the family had spent around 20 lakhs on the marriage, including a Bullet bike, gold and cash, but harassment persisted. The family also alleged kajal suffered multiple injuries and had been subjected to prolonged torture and dowry harassment, even during pregnancy.

LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS

SATBIR SINGH v. STATE OF HARYANA (2010)

Facts of this case

On July 1st,1994 accused was married and after 1 year of marriage the wife dies. As soon as her father came to know that her daughter is died due to fire burning. After that he filed a case on the accused and his brother under IPC section 304B that is dowry death and section 306 abetment of suicide. Accused did this because after marriage her daughter many times told him and his son that because she brought less dowry, she was facing a lot of harassment and cruelty in her matrimonial home.

Issue raised 

Whether the trial Court and the High Court, was correct in convicting the accused on the charge under section 304B, IPC?

Whether the Trial Court and the   High   Court was correct in convicting the accused on the charge under Section 306, IPC?

JUDGEMENT 

The Hon’ble Supreme Court analyzed that, the interpretation of Section 304B IPC, and specially in the interpretation of the phase that was “soon before the death”. It was stated that IPC in a criminal statue that the interpretation must be literal and strict and if such interpretation goes against the spirit of the statute itself also.

CONCLUSION

Dowry is not merely a social custom but a serious violation of women’s constitutional and human rights. Despite being criminalized under the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and reinforced through provisions of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the practice continues to cause harassment, cruelty, and dowry deaths across India. It directly infringes Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution by denying women equality, dignity, and the right to life.

Judicial interpretations in landmark cases such as Satvir Singh v. State of Haryana and recent convictions in dowry death cases demonstrate that courts recognize dowry-related violence as a grave legal and constitutional wrong. However, persistent NCRB data and contemporary incidents reveal that legislation alone is insufficient without strict enforcement, social awareness, and a change in patriarchal mindsets.

Therefore, eliminating dowry requires not only legal accountability but also societal transformation that affirms women’s dignity, autonomy, and equal status in marriage and family life.

REFERNCE(S):

1. The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961
2. Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023