Authored By: Aparna Aparupa Satapathy
SOA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF LAW
Abstract
One of the most significant social and legal problems affecting married women in India is still dowry death. Conviction rates in dowry death cases frequently remain as low as 15%[1] due to shortcomings in investigation and evidentiary problems, even in the face of stringent legal restrictions like Section 80 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita[2] and the presumption under Section 114 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam[3]. In order to provide victims with justice and hold offenders accountable, thorough investigations and appropriate evidence gathering are essential. The function of investigation and evidence in dowry death cases within the Indian criminal justice system is examined in this study. It examines the duties of magistrates, police officers, and forensic specialists in carrying out in-depth investigations in cases of suspicious deaths of married women. This study looks at how investigations and evidence procedures function in dowry death cases and analyses how flaws in these procedures frequently impact the prosecution’s outcome. It talks about the legal structure that governs dowry deaths and emphasizes how crucial it is to demonstrate the accused’s guilt through a proper police investigation, forensic examination, witness testimony, medical evidence, and dying declarations. The study highlights the necessity of more robust investigative processes, enhanced evidence standards, and institutional reforms to guarantee accountability and efficient execution of the law by analyzing pertinent court rulings and legal provisions. In order to provide victims with justice and deal with the larger social issue of dowry-related violence, these procedures must be strengthened.
Keywords: Dowry Death, Dowry-related Cruelty, Criminal Investigation, Evidentiary Presumption
Introduction
In Indian society, numerous problems continue to exist, such as the caste system, superstition, gender inequality, etc. Among them, one of the most harmful practices is dowry. Dowry, which started in the ancient period with the intention of providing financial security and protection to the daughters in their matrimonial home, has gradually turned into an evil practice, and in contemporary times, it has become almost compulsory to give dowry to the groom’s side during the time of marriage, which, in extreme cases, leads to dowry death. Dowry death cases are rising in India.
The Dowry Prohibition Act of 1961 defines dowry, not the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). Section 114 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) establishes a presumption against the husband or his relatives if such harassment occurred shortly before the woman’s death, and Section 80 BNS defines dowry death as when cruelty or harassment related to dowry causes a woman to die within the prescribed period of marriage. However, as dowry deaths typically take place in the married household, where direct proof is uncommon, it is crucial to properly investigate and assess the surrounding circumstances. Therefore, the court in the case of kans raj v. State of Punjab[4], noted that assessing responsibility in dowry death cases requires a thorough examination of the surrounding circumstances and a proper appreciation of the evidence.
Given these concerns, this article assesses the role of evidence and investigation in dowry death cases and looks at the difficulties in guaranteeing successful prosecution. To guarantee justice for victims of dowry-related violence, the study also aims to draw attention to the necessity of legal and procedural changes that would improve investigative procedures and evidence standards.
Meaning and Legal framework of dowry death
The word Dowry has not been defined under BNS, but it has been defined under the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. According to the Act, Dowry means any property or valuable security that is directly or indirectly given or promised to be supplied: by one married couple to the other married couple or by either party’s parents, by any other individual to either party, or by any other individual at any point before, during, or following the marriage in connection with the aforementioned parties’ marriage.[5]
Section 80 of BNS defines dowry as “If a woman dies within seven years of marriage by any burns or bodily injury, or it was revealed that before her marriage she was exposed to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any other relative of the husband in connection with the demand for dowry then the death of the woman will be considered as dowry death.”
In this section, the punishment has also been enumerated as imprisonment not less than 7years which may extend to life imprisonment.
Therefore, to establish the offence of dowry death, some essentials must be fulfilled, which are-
- Death must be caused by burns, bodily injury, or other circumstances.
- Death must occur within seven years of marriage.
- It must be disclosed that, soon before her marriage, she was exposed to cruelty or
- Harassment by her husband or any other relative of her husband.
- The cruelty or harassment of her should be connected to the demand for dowry.
- Such cruelty or harassment must have happened prior to her death.[6]
To establish dowry death, another important element, cruelty, must be established. Section 85 of BNS talks about cruelty. According to which cruelty is any deliberate behaviour that could lead a woman to commit suicide or seriously harm her life, limb, or health, as well as harassment intended to force her or her family to comply with illegal demands for property or important security. To prove dowry death under section 80 of BNS, one must prove cruelty under section 85 of BNS.[7] The Supreme Court held in the case of Shanti v. State of Haryana.[8] that Sections 304B and 498A do not conflict with one another. The prosecution must demonstrate that dowry demands were accompanied by harsh or harassing behaviour in order to prosecute someone under Section 304B.
In addition to this, the BSA provide the presumption under section 114. According to this section, the court will assume that the husband or his family members caused the dowry death if it is demonstrated that a woman died in conditions that amounted to dowry death and that she was harassed or cruelly treated for dowry shortly before her death.[9] This presumption recognizes the difficulty of acquiring direct evidence in such offences, shifting the burden of proof to the accused and bolstering the prosecution’s case. In Sham Lal v. State of Haryana[10], The court noted that although the presumption under Section 113B is required, the prosecution still has to prove the necessary circumstances in order to use the assumption.
For an act to be treated as a dowry death, all the above elements must be fulfilled.
Role of Investigation in Dowry Death Cases
Investigation starts as soon as the police receive an FIR under Section 80 of BNS. They first register this FIR and start the investigation process, where they go to the scene of the occurrence of the crime and look over the scene of death, gather tangible evidence such as burned clothing, kerosene containers, matchsticks, or poison bottles, and document witness accounts from relatives, neighbours, and family members. To ascertain whether there were any dowry demands, abuse, or harassment prior to the death, the police also look into the deceased’s marital history. Determining whether the death was caused by suicide, an accident, or homicide is the goal of the police investigation.
Inquest by Executive Magistrate
Another step of Investigation as the law mandates, is done by an Executive Magistrate, typically the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM), conduct an inquest in dowry death cases. Section 194 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governs this inquest. The magistrate analyses the circumstances surrounding the death and examines the deceased’s body. Statements from the deceased’s relatives are documented, particularly those from parents or other close family members who might have evidence regarding dowry harassment.[11] This inquest’s goals are to guarantee the investigation’s openness and equity and to ascertain whether there are enough reasons to suspect cruelty or violence connected to dowries.
Post-Mortem Analysis
A post-mortem examination is required in circumstances where dowry death is suspected. Typically, a team or board of doctors, composed of trained medical professionals, performs the autopsy. The post-mortem aids in identifying the precise cause of death as well as the type of damage the body has medical professionals look for evidence of poisoning, strangling, or physical assault, as well as whether the burns or injuries happened before or after death. To differentiate between accidental death, suicide, and homicide, medical findings are essential.
Scene of Investigation
A crucial component of the inquiry is the crime scene inspection. Investigators pay close attention to and record the scene of the death. They examine things including the body’s posture, the kind and severity of burns, and the existence of combustible materials like gasoline or kerosene. Additionally, they search for traces of a fight, such as shattered objects or signs of commotion in the room. Reconstructing the circumstances leading up to the death is made easier for investigators when the scene is well documented and evidence is gathered.[12]
Role and Types of Evidence in Dowry Death Cases
Evidence plays a crucial role in dowry death cases as it helps to distinguish between a suicide committed by a woman for any other reason and a dowry death case. In a dowry death case, as direct evidence is not available, the court has to consider different kinds of evidence, like circumstantial evidence, medical evidence, Witness testimony, etc., to consider whether there was any dowry-related cruelty and harassment by the spouse and in-laws.
The different types of evidence that the court considers are:
Circumstantial Evidence
Since there are typically no direct eyewitnesses in dowry killing cases, the prosecution mostly depends on circumstantial evidence. The surrounding facts and circumstances that subtly suggest the accused’s participation are referred to as circumstantial evidence. Prior dowry demands, a history of harassment, threats from the spouse or in-laws, and the accused’s actions both before and after the death are a few examples. In Vikas v. State of Rajasthan (2014)[13], the Court ruled that dowry death can be determined by circumstantial evidence, such as parents’ or neighbours’ accounts of harassment.[14]
Therefore, this circumstantial evidence plays a vital role in establishing a connection between dowry harassment and dowry death.
Medical Evidence
One of the most important types of evidence in dowry death cases is medical evidence, which aids in identifying the precise cause and manner of death. This evidence often originates from the forensic investigation, medical evaluation of injuries, and post-mortem report. Doctors employ medical examinations to identify whether the death was caused by strangling, burns, poisoning, or other unnatural causes. It also aids in determining whether the injuries occurred before or after death. To differentiate between suicide, accident, and homicide, courts frequently depend significantly on medical evidence. In Sundar Lal v. State of Rajasthan[15], The court held that, for instance, the post-mortem report showed that the victim died from hypoxia brought on by strangling, ruling out accidental death and indicating foul play.[16]
Witness Evidence
Another crucial piece of evidence in dowry death cases is witness testimony. Witnesses who can provide testimony on the victim’s treatment in her married house may include the deceased’s parents, relatives, neighbours, acquaintances, or coworkers. Family members frequently provide details regarding the deceased’s complaints, harassment, and dowry demands prior to her passing. However, there may occasionally be issues with witness testimony, such as inconsistencies, witness animosity, or a dearth of independent testimony. Because witnesses made contradictory testimony or were unable to establish dowry harassment beyond a reasonable doubt, courts have occasionally found defendants not guilty.[17] In Satbir Singh v State of Haryana, the Supreme Court emphasized that courts must carefully examine witness testimony and surrounding circumstances while determining whether the essential ingredients of dowry death are satisfied.[18]
Dying Proclamation
A deathbed declaration is a statement made by the victim before her passing that details the events or source of the injuries that ultimately caused her demise. According to section 30(1) of BSA[19], a dying declaration is accepted as evidence in India. If the court is convinced that the statement was provided willingly and truthfully, it may serve as the only foundation for conviction. The Supreme Court ruled in Phulel Singh v. State of Haryana (2023)[20] that a trustworthy deathbed declaration may be enough to support a conviction even in the absence of further evidence, provided it is determined to be voluntary and free from coercion or instruction.
Physical and Forensic Proof
In dowry death investigations, forensic and tangible evidence gathered at the murder site is very crucial. Kerosene containers, matchsticks, burned clothes, poison bottles, and other items discovered at the scene of the incident are examples of such evidence. Investigators can recreate the events and ascertain if the death was the result of a crime, suicide, or accident by using scientific analysis of these items. The prosecution’s case is strengthened by a thorough forensic investigation, which also helps courts reach a fair verdict.
Problems in Investigation and Evidence
There are many weaknesses in the system due to which, in many cases, proper evidence cannot be found. Police inactivity, delayed filing of First Information Reports (FIRs), and inadequate forensic evidence gathering and recording are common issues in dowry death cases. These mistakes make it more difficult for the prosecution to prove its case, which results in the guilty being acquitted and injustice continuing. Poor police investigations, in which officials neglect to carry out exhaustive forensic analyses or appropriately gather evidence at the crime site, are a significant problem. Research on dowry death cases highlights that conviction is only feasible if a thorough and methodical investigation is conducted at the outset; nevertheless, in many situations, the inquiry is either mechanical or insufficient.[21]
The delay in submitting the First Information Report (FIR) and starting an investigation is another serious issue that might cause important evidence to be lost or contaminated. Furthermore, evidence is routinely destroyed or tampered with, particularly since these occurrences typically occur in the marital residence, where the accused may have authority over the crime scene. Additionally, witnesses like neighbours or family members may experience social pressure or intimidation, which deters them from giving honest evidence. The victim’s family is frequently discouraged from aggressively pursuing legal action due to social shame and familial pressure. These structural flaws, together with a dearth of witnesses and societal pressures, are a major factor in the low conviction rates in dowry killing cases in India, according to research on dowry death trials.[22]
Reforms Needed
Reforms must strike a balance between the necessity of deterrence and measures to prevent abuse. The framework may be strengthened in a number of ways.
First, statutory clarity is needed to define “cruelty” and “dowry demand” strictly to avoid using them too broadly. While ensuring that legitimate instances are not written off as ordinary marital disputes, more precise criteria would lower the possibility of abuse.[23]
Second, special courts with time-bound mandates for dowry death trials should be established as part of judicial reforms. Fast-track trials would guarantee that cases don’t drag on for years, giving victims’ families prompt justice and discouraging repeat offenders.
Third, obligatory compensation plans, financial assistance, and shelters must all be used to improve victim protection. Compensation for the families of dowry death victims should be provided from the state welfare schemes or a fine given by the offender. Fourth, district-level monitoring systems, such as dowry prohibition agents with enforcement authority, ought to be established. To stop dowries, these officers might work with the police, keep an eye on investigations, and engage the community. [24] Lastly, legal reform needs to be accompanied by social transformation. Dismantling the societal acceptance of dowries requires awareness campaigns, women’s empowerment projects, and educational activities. The patriarchal conventions that uphold dowry practices must be vigorously challenged by schools, universities, and community institutions to advance gender equality.
Analysis of Important Landmark Judgements based on Dowry Death
Satbir Singh v. State of Haryana (2021)[25]
Citation: [2021] 6 SCC 1.
Prosecution: State of Haryana
Defendant: Satbir Singh
Facts of the case
In this case, within seven years of her marriage, the deceased woman passed away from burn injuries. Her parents claimed that because of dowry demand, her husband and his family had harassed and mistreated her regularly. The dead had repeatedly complained about dowry demands and mistreatment in her married home, according to the prosecutors. Following her demise, a case was filed under Sections 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code against the husband and his family. The accused was found guilty by the trial court, and the case ultimately reached the Supreme Court.
Issues
Whether the prosecution was able to prove that the deceased woman had been harassed or cruelly treated for dowry “soon before her death,” which is a prerequisite for the dowry death offence under Section 304B IPC.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court explained that the phrase “soon before her death” refers to a close and real connection between the woman’s death and the torture she endured in exchange for dowry, rather than necessarily meaning immediately before her death. The Court concluded that the presumption under Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act must be adopted by the court whenever the prosecution establishes that the woman was subjected to dowry-related abuse shortly before her death, and then the burden shifts to the accused.
Obiter dicta
The Court further noted that dowry deaths are a significant social issue in India and stressed the necessity for courts to handle these cases with tact and rigour. It also made clear that the legislative goal of Section 304B IPC is to reduce the increasing threat of violence related to dowries and protect married women from harassment and cruelty.
Judgment
In addition to affirming the conviction, the Supreme Court reiterated the rules that apply in dowry killing cases. The prosecution must prove the necessary elements of Section 304B IPC, the Court stressed, and once the prosecution proves dowry harassment just prior to her death, the presumption under Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act must be applied, and then it is up to the accused to refute the inference of dowry death. The court also gave emphasized on properly taking into consideration the testimonies of the witnesses, circumstantial evidence and medical reports in determining the guilt of the accused.
Kans Raj v. State of Punjab (2000)[26]
Citation: [2000] 5 SCC 207.
Prosecution: State of Punjab
Defendant: Kans Raj and others
Facts of the case
In this instance, a married woman passed away under suspicious circumstances within seven years of getting married. Her family claimed that her husband and his family had tormented and harassed her in exchange for the dowry. The prosecution claimed that she was subjected to additional dowry demands, non-fulfilment of which led to cruelty against the woman and ultimately her death. After her demise, a case was filed under Section 304B of IPC. The accused refuted these claims and asserted that dowry harassment had nothing to do with the death.
Issues
Whether the prosecution’s evidence was adequate to prove that the dead was harassed or cruelly treated in exchange for dowry shortly before she passed away, making dowry death an offence under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court ruled that in cases involving dowry deaths, judges must carefully consider the circumstances surrounding the death and decide if there is a direct link between the woman’s death and the cruelty she endured for the dowry. The Court also made it plain that family members should only be held accountable if there is solid evidence of their involvement.
Obiter dicta
The Court observed that in dowry death cases, it is common to blame all of the husband’s relatives without enough proof. To ensure that the wicked are punished, courts must ensure that innocent people are not wrongly implicated.
Judgement
The Supreme Court upheld the convictions of those against whom there was adequate proof of dowry harassment, but it partially granted the appeal by clearing some of the accused due to insufficient evidence. The ruling highlighted how crucial it is to carefully consider the evidence in dowry death cases.
Phulel Singh v. State of Haryana (2023)[27]
Citation: [2023] 10 SCC 268.
Prosecution: State of Haryana
Defendant: Phulel Singh
Facts of the case
In this case, the deceased woman had serious burn injuries before passing away. While she was receiving treatment on the hospital, she made her declaration after which she passed away. She claimed that her husband had set her on fire. After the demise of the victim, a case was filed against the husband and in-laws under Section 304B IPC and Section 498A of IPC. As the main piece of evidence against the accused, the prosecution mostly relied on the dying statement. The defence contested the validity of the dying declaration, claiming that the deceased was not in the right physical and mental state to make such a statement.
Issue
whether the deceased’s dying declaration, even if it was the main piece of evidence in the case, could be trusted as legitimate and adequate proof for conviction.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court ruled that a deathbed declaration can serve as the only foundation for conviction without the need for corroboration, provided it is determined to be voluntary, true, and recorded when the victim was in a fit mental state. Because a person near death is considered to speak the truth, the Court reiterated that such comments are admissible under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act.
Obiter Dicta
must carefully consider whether the statement was made willingly and if the person making it was in a fit state of mind. A deathbed declaration should ideally be recorded by a magistrate and backed by medical confirmation, but this isn’t always required if the court is confident in its credibility, the court added.
Judgement
The Supreme Court affirmed the deathbed declaration’s evidentiary significance and reaffirmed that, provided it is reliable and well documented, it can be used as substantial evidence. The Court stressed that even in the absence of further supporting evidence, the deathbed declaration may serve as the only foundation for conviction if it is deemed credible and trustworthy.
Conclusion
One of the most severe forms of violence against women in India is still dowry death, which is a reflection of deeply ingrained societal customs that put married women’s lives in jeopardy. Even though there are strict legal provisions like Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and the evidentiary presumption under Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, the quality of the investigation and the strength of the evidence that is presented in court determine how effective these laws are. Because dowry killing trials frequently take place within the marital residence, the lack of direct witnesses makes thorough investigation, appropriate forensic evidence gathering, and trustworthy witness testimony crucial to proving the accused’s guilt.
However, as this article discusses, the prosecution’s case is often weakened and acquittals occur due to a number of systemic flaws, including insufficient police investigation, delays in registering complaints, evidence destruction, and societal pressure on the victim’s family. These flaws undercut the goal of the legislative framework intended to prevent violence connected to dowries. Stronger investigation techniques, improved training for law enforcement officials, and more institutional responsibility are therefore desperately needed to guarantee that criminals are prosecuted. In addition to increasing conviction rates, these procedures must be strengthened to safeguard women’s basic rights, safety, and dignity in society.
Bibliography
- Table of Cases
Kans Raj v State of Punjab [2000] 5 SCC 207.
Shanti v State of Haryana [1991] AIR SC 1226.
Sham Lal v State of Haryana [1997] AIR SC 1873.
Vikas v State of Rajasthan [2014] 3 SCC 321.
Sunder Lal v State of Rajasthan [1975] 3 SCC 507.
Satbir Singh v State of Haryana [2021] 6 SCC 1.
Phul Singh v State of Haryana [2011] 13 SCC 182.
- Table of Statutes
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023.
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023.
Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023.
Dowry Prohibition Act 1961.
Indian Evidence Act 1872.
- Journal Articles
Kuwal N and Singh M, ‘The Dowry Prohibition Act in Indian Courts: Evaluating the Effectiveness, Conviction Rates, and Challenges of Misuse’ (2025) 8(2) International Journal of Advanced Research in Commerce, Management & Social Science 123 <https://inspirajournals.com/uploads/Issues/774368394.pdf> accessed 14 March 2026
Murty OP, ‘Dowry Crimes Investigation’ (2002) 4(2) International Journal of Medical Toxicology and Legal Medicine <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260955963_Dowry_crimes_investigation> accessed 14 March 2026.
Tandon P, ‘Evaluating the Efficacy of the Dowry Prohibition Act 1961 in India: An Analysis of Legal Provisions, Enforcement Mechanisms, and Their Alignment with Changing Social Realities’ (2024) 6(3) International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research <https://www.ijfmr.com/papers/2024/3/14532.pdf> accessed 14 March 2026.
- Web Sources / Blog Articles
Mahawar S, ‘Section 304B IPC’ (iPleaders, 16 June 2022) <https://blog.ipleaders.in/section-304b-ipc/> accessed 13 March 2026.
‘Dowry Death and Evidentiary Challenges’ Law Gratis (22 September 2025) <https://www.lawgratis.com/blog-detail/dowry-death-and-evidentiary-challenges> accessed 14 March 2026.
‘Dowry Deaths and Legal Provisions: An Analysis of IPC and Judicial Response’ The Legal Quorum (23 June 2025) <https://thelegalquorum.com/dowry-deaths-and-legal-provisions-an-analysis-of-ipc-and-judicial-response-2/> accessed 14 March 2026.
Ojha V and Singh P, ‘Supreme Court Shocker: “Dowry Not Needed to Prove Cruelty under Section 498A IPC”’ LawChakra <https://lawchakra.in/supreme-court/supreme-court-dowry-498a-ipc/> accessed 18 September 2025.
[1] Deepak Juyal, Shweta Thaledi and Benu Dhawan, ‘Blame, Shame and Victimisation of Men under Anti-Dowry Laws: The Legal Miscarriage’ (2025) 12(2) Indian Journal of Forensic and Community Medicine 129 <https://doi.org/10.18231/j.ijfcm.2025.021>
[2] Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, s 80
[3] Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023, s 114.
[4] Kans Raj v State of Punjab [2000] 5 SCC 207
[5] The Dowry Prohibition Act 1961, No 28 of 1961, India
[6] Mahawar S, “Section 304B IPC” (iPleaders, June 16, 2022) <https://blog.ipleaders.in/section-304b-ipc/> accessed March 13, 2026
[7] Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, s 85
[8] Shanti v State of Haryana, [1991] AIR SC 1226.
[9] Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) 2023, s 85.
[10] Sham Lal v. State of Haryana, [1997] AIR SC 1873.
[11] Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, s 194.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Vikas v State of Rajasthan [2014] 3 SCC 321.
[14] Dowry Death And Evidentiary Challenges” (Law Gratis, September 22, 2025) <https://www.lawgratis.com/blog-detail/dowry-death-and-evidentiary-challenges> accessed March 14, 2026
[15] Sunder Lal v State of Rajasthan [1975] 3 SCC 507.
[16] O P Murty, ‘Dowry Crimes Investigation’ (2002) 4(2) International Journal of Medical Toxicology and Legal Medicine < https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260955963_Dowry_crimes_investigation> accessed 14 March 2026
[17] Ibid.
[18] Satbir Singh v State of Haryana [2021] 6 SCC 1.
[19] Indian Evidence Act 1872, s 32(1).
[20] Phulel Singh v State of Haryana [2023] 10 SCC 268.
[21] The Legal Quorum, “Dowry Deaths and Legal Provisions: An Analysis of IPC and Judicial Response” (The Legal Quorum, June 23, 2025) <https://thelegalquorum.com/dowry-deaths-and-legal-provisions-an-analysis-of-ipc-and-judicial-response-2/> accessed March 14, 2026
[22] Nitesh Kuwal and Monika Singh, ‘The Dowry Prohibition Act in Indian Courts: Evaluating the Effectiveness, Conviction Rates, and Challenges of Misuse’ (2025) 8(2) International Journal of Advanced Research in Commerce, Management & Social Science 123 <https://inspirajournals.com/uploads/Issues/774368394.pdf> accessed 14 March 202
[23] V Ojha and P Singh, ‘Supreme Court Shocker: “Dowry Not Needed to Prove Cruelty under Section 498A IPC”’ LawChakra <https://lawchakra.in/supreme-court/supreme-court-dowry-498a-ipc/> accessed 18 September 2025.
[24] Pakhi Tandon, ‘Evaluating the Efficacy of the Dowry Prohibition Act 1961 in India: An Analysis of Legal Provisions, Enforcement Mechanisms, and Their Alignment with Changing Social Realities’ (2024) 6(3) International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research <https://www.ijfmr.com/papers/2024/3/14532.pdf> accessed 14 March 2026.
[25] Satbir Singh v State of Haryana [2021] 6 SCC 1.
[26] Kans Raj v State of Punjab [2000] 5 SCC 207.
[27] Phulel Singh v State of Haryana [2023] 10 SCC 268.
