SEO

MODULE 6: LAWS RELATING TO CERTAIN SOCIAL OFFENCES

6.1 DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, 1961

DR SATYAJIT MOHANTY, IPS RETD

SOME REVEALING STATISTICS – 2022 NCRB

Heads Dowry Prohibition Act Cruelty by Dowry Death 304B IPC

Husband/Relative 498A
IPS
Total offences registered 13479 140019 6450
Chargesheet % 84 84.5 87.6
Pending Trial 75302 852595 60577
Conviction 1847 8307 1231
Acquittal 3236 35998 2189
Conviction Rate 35.8 17.7 33.4
DOWRY - DEFINED

 “Dowry” means any property or valuable security given or agreed to be given either directly or indirectly -
 (a) by one party to a marriage to the other party to the marriage; or
 (b) 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 the marriage] [in connection with the marriage of the said parties, but does not
include] dower or mahr in the case of persons to whom the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) applies.
 Dower is existed in the Muslim community since the Pre-Islamic period, it is an old custom and is given as an
honour to wife
DOWRY DEFINED

 The definition of ‘’dowry’’ as at present raises the following issues:

 What is meant by the phrase “directly or indirectly”?
 How the phrase “in connection with marriage” be defined?
 What time period is envisaged by the use of the phrase “any time after marriage”?
 Does this definition include all gifts and exchanges given in connection with marriage?
 To gather an understanding of the coverage of this law, the definition in Section 2 has to be read in conjunction
with Section 3 which provides for the penalties for the act of giving or taking of dowry. Demand of dowry has
been made an offence u/s 4 of the Act.
PENAL PROVISION

 Giving or taking or abetment of giving or taking of dowry is made punishable (Sec 3)

 However, exemptions are provided to the following categories of exchanges:
 Presents given at the time of the marriage to the bride without any prior demands being made for such presents
 Presents that are “customary” in nature and of a value that is not excessive having regard to the financial status of
the person by whom, or on whose behalf such presents are being given.
 A list of all such presents have to be maintained according to the Rules formulated under this law.
INTERPRETATION

 It is evident from a reading of both these provisions, that the law does not prohibit all exchanges at the time of
marriage.
 At the same time, the Act does put in place some safeguards to ensure that the presents given at the time of
marriage are not pursuant to any demands being made or any other form of coercion.
 To this extent, Section 4 of the Act stipulates separate penalties for those making any demands for dowry.
 Ironically, the DPA not only penalises those who make demands for dowry or take dowry but also those who give
dowry.
 This ignores the reality of the present society wherein the practice of dowry is so ingrained that dowry is given
involuntarily, even without any demands made in this regard.
 Parents of the bride feel compelled to give dowry in order to ensure the “happiness” and “security” of their
daughter by appeasing the in-laws by giving them dowry.
 WHAT IF THE MARRIAGE COULD NOT BE SOLEMNISED IF DEMANDS
ARE NOT FULFILLED

 S.Gopal Reddy vs State Of Andhra Pradesh AIR 1996 SC 2184,

 The appellant along with his brother was tried for offences under Section 420 IPC read with Section 4 Dowry
Prohibition Act, 1961- convicted by the trial court, upheld by the High Court – SLP on SC
 The Act is a piece of social legislation which aims to check the growing menace of the social evil of dowry and it makes
punishable not only the actual receiving of dowry but also the very demand of dowry made before or at the time or
after the marriage where such demand is referable to the consideration of marriage.
 Dowry as a quid pro for marriage is prohibited
 Keeping in view the object of the Act, "demand of dowry" as a consideration for a proposed marriage would also come
within the meaning of the expression dowry under the Act.
 Therefore, interpreting the expression 'dowry and 'demand' in the context of the scheme of the Act, we are of the
opinion that any 'demand of 'dowry' made before at or after the marriage, where such demand is made as a
consideration for marriage would attract the provisions of Section 4 of the Act.
DOWRY & STRIDHAN

 The Punjab and Haryana High Court in Vinod Kumar Sethi v. Punjab State has given an important decision
with respect to Stridhan.
 According to this High Court whatever has been received by a bride in marriage or whatever has been gifted to
her falls under Stridhan.
 The court divided the gifts and dowry given to her under three heads. First, those items which are given to the
bride for her exclusive use; secondly, those which are to be used by her and her husband jointly and thirdly, those
which, are to be used by her husband and in laws.
 High court quashed the complaint on the grounds that the concept of stridhan stood abolished in view of the fact
that, in matrimony, all assets were held jointly..
PRATIBHA RANI – THE LANDMARK JUDGMENT

 Pratibha Rani vs. Suraj Kumar (1985 AIR 628) the Supreme Court disagreed with the above view of the Punjab and
Haryana High Court and held that whatever gifts, presentations and dowry articles are given to a woman in marriage,
would be regarded as her absolute property.
 The sheer fact that she is staying with her husband and using the present items together does not make any difference
and affect her right of absolute ownership over them.
 The view of Punjab and Haryana High Court that the dowry goods become joint property of the husband as well as of
the wife and both of them implementation equal right and control over them is incorrect.
 The court observed, it cannot be said that once a woman enters her marital home, she completely loses her limited
Stridhan by the same being treated as a joint property of the spouses.
 Stridhan property of a married woman, even if it is placed in the safekeeping of her husband or in-laws, they would be
considered to be trustees and therefore are destined to return the same when commanded by her.
 The defendant husband in the instant case may be called and put on trial in accord with the Criminal law as under
Section 405/406 of IPC.
DEMAND FOR MONEY FOR FINANCIAL STRINGENCY- DOWRY?

 Appasaheb v. State of Maharashtra (2007) 9 SCC 721 – case of dowry death

 It was argued that there was no demand of dowry by the appellant but it was merely an understanding that for
his better business, at best, the amounts could be given voluntarily by the father of the deceased.
 The giving or taking of property or valuable security must have some connection with the marriage of the parties
and a correlation between the giving or taking of property or valuable security with the marriage of the parties is
essential. Being a penal provision it has to be strictly construed.
 A demand for money on account of some financial stringency or for meeting some urgent domestic expenses or
for purchasing manure cannot be termed as a demand for dowry as the said word is normally understood.
SOME LEADING CASES INTERPRETING DOWRY

 In the case of Ram Singh v. State of Haryana [(2008) 4 SCC 70], the SC held that the payments which are
customary payments, for example, given at the time of birth of a child or other ceremonies as are prevalent in
the society or families to the marriage, would not be covered under the expression `dowry’.
 In the case of Madhu Sudan Malhotra v. K.C. Bhandari [(1988) Supp. 1 SCC 424], SC held that furnishing of
a list of ornaments and other household articles such as refrigerator, furniture and electrical appliances etc., to
the parents or guardians of the bride, at the time of settlement of the marriage, prima facie amounts to demand
of dowry within the meaning of Section 2 of the Act.
 The definition of `dowry' is not restricted to agreement or demand for payment of dowry before and at the time
of marriage but even include subsequent demands, was the dictum of this Court in the case of State of Andhra
Pradesh v. Raj Gopal Asawa [(2004) 4 SCC 470].
RULES FOR LIST OF GIFT ITEM TO BE TO BE MADE U/S SEC 3 DPA
 THE DOWRY PROHIBITION (MAINTENANCE OF LISTS OF PRESENTS TO THE BRIDE AND
BRIDEGROOM) RULES, 1985
 In exercise of the powers conferred by Sec.9 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, the Central Government hereby
makes the following rules, namely:
 Short title and commencement:
 (1) These rules may be called the Dowry Prohibition (Maintenance of Lists of Presents to the Bride and Bridegroom)
Rules, 1985.
 Rules in accordance with which lists of presents are to be maintained:
 (1) The list of presents which are given at the time of the marriage to the bride shall be maintained by the bride.
 (2) The list of present which are given at the time of the marriage to the bridegroom shall be maintained by the
bridegroom.
 Every list of presents referred to in sub-rule (1) or sub-rule (2), shall be prepared at the time of the marriage or as soon
as possible after the marriage: shall be in writing; shall contain,-
 a brief description of each present; the approximate value of the present; the name of the person who has given the
present; and where the person giving the present is related to the bride or bridegroom, a description of such
relationship; shall be signed by both the bride and the bridegroom.
THE GAPS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED

 Dowry
 What is meant by the phrase “directly or indirectly”?
 How the phrase “in connection with marriage” be defined?
 What time period is envisaged by the use of the phrase “any time after marriage”?
 Does this definition include all gifts and exchanges given in connection with marriage?
 The Act does not provide adequate guidelines for differentiating items given under the guise of “gift/presents” from
those extorted as “dowry”. If the intent of the law is to prohibit dowry, meaning thereby any exchanges given pursuant
to demands or under any form of coercion whether implicit or explicit, a clear distinction must be made between “gifts”
given voluntarily from those given under duress or compulsion.
 The expression “presents” used in Section 3(2) of the Act should be substituted with the expression “gifts” to indicate
the voluntary intent behind the exchange. The expression “gifts” finds definition in law under the Gift-Tax Act 1958
 Further, a distinction between “dowry” and “stridhan” or gifts received, as “stridhan” must be provided for
THE GAPS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED- STRIDHAN

 In Pratibha Rani the Supreme Court tried to arrive at a definition of “Stridhan” by enlisting the following
exchanges as constituting “stridhan”
 (i) gifts made before the nuptial fire
 (ii) gifts made at the bridal procession, i.e. while the bride is being led from her residence of her parents to that of
her husband.
 (iii)Gifts made in token of love, that is, those made by her father-in-law and mother-in-law and those made at the
time of the bride making obeisance at the feet of elders.
 (iv)Gifts made by the father of the bride
 (v) Gifts made by the mother of the bride
 (vi)Gifts made by the brother of the bride.
 A reference to the items that can be received as “Stridhan” should therefore find specific mention under the
Act
IN CONNECTION WITH MARRIAGE
 The requirement that dowry be defined as being “in connection with marriage” fails to recognize that most
marriage negotiations are done confidentially and that any discussion about dowry exchange will be covert.
 Defendants can easily be acquitted by arguing that gifts given during marriage over a period of years were
voluntary, out of affection, or connected with events apart from marriage, such as childbirths or religious festivals.
 In the case of Arjun Dhondida Kamble v. State of Maharashtra the deceased had committed suicide due to
the non fulfillment of a demand made by the in-laws. The demand was in conformity with the existent custom. The
Bombay High Court held that “giving presents are a part of a custom and giving such presents at festive occasions
is in no connection with marriage.”
 Madan Lal v. Amar Nath the court stated that dowry would not include property that may pass hands
subsequent to the marriage, even months or years after it, merely to save the marriage from being broken or to
smoothen the course of matrimonial life , or to keep the family of the in-laws of the wife better disposed towards
her”.
 Suggestions: The definition of “dowry” may be amended to include a specific prohibition of exchanges made
both at the time of and any time after the marriage. Emphasis needs to be placed on the existence of
“demand/involuntary” even if the gifts may be “customary” in nature. The term “in connection with marriages”
may need to be suitably worded.
PENALTY NEEDS TO BE RATIONALISED
 The Act makes giving or taking of dowry a punishable offence.
 The giver and the taker of dowry cannot be placed on the same footing under the law.
 At the same time, the culpability of the givers of dowry cannot be negated.
 Hence there must be a distinction made between the extent of culpability of the givers and the takers of dowry.
 The provisions of the DPA provide limited protection to the givers of dowry seeking to file a complaint under this law.
 Under Section 7(3) of the DPA, prosecutions under this law cannot be initiated based on statements made by a person
aggrieved.
 Suggestions: Amendments may be required in Section 3 of the DPA to the following effect:
 1. provide for separate penalties to the giver and takers of dowry
 2. Introduce penalties for the non-maintenance of lists of gifts received at the time of the marriage.
 3. Include parents and relatives of the bride as aggrieved persons within the ambit of Section 7 (3) of the DPA.
SECTION 6: REVERSION OF DOWRY

 Sec 6 provides that where any dowry is received by any person other than the woman in connection with whose
marriage it is given, that person shall transfer it to the woman within a specific time period of three months
 Failure to transfer the property within the period prescribed will attract the penalties provided for in the clause.
 The problematic issue that arises vis - à- vis this provision is in relation to the manner of devolution of such
property on the death of the woman.. Hence if the woman dies due to natural circumstances, the property will
devolve on the heirs of the woman. However, in case of death within seven years of marriage, the properties will
be inherited by the children or parents.
 Under most inheritance laws in India, the husband is recognized as an heir of the wife (Class 1 heir).
 Gifts received at the time of marriage from her parents which would basically amount to Stridhan would be
governed by this law.
 Suggestions: The provision relating to the death of the woman in unnatural circumstance may be deleted and all
property obtained as dowry to revert to the parents of the woman or her children, as the case may be on the
death of the woman for any reason whatsoever.
DOWRY DEATH

 Section 304B IPC:

 The essentials of Section 304B are as follows:
 (1) The death of a woman must be caused within by burns or bodily injury or otherwise than under normal
circumstances
 (2) The death must occur within 7 years of marriage
 (3) Woman must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives.
 (4) Cruelty or harassment should be in connection with the demand of dowry
 (5) Such cruelty or harassment is shown to have been meted out to the woman soon before her death
CRUELTY ON ACCOUNT OF DEMAND OF DOWRY 498 A IPC

 Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be
punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.
 Explanation.—For the purposes of this section,
 “cruelty” means –
 (a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause
grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or
 (b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her
to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any
person related to her to meet such demand.
 Cruelty or harassment of the lady by her husband or his relative for or in connection with any demand for any
property or valuable security as a demand for dowry or in connection therewith is the common constituent of
both the offences. Charan Singh v. State of Uttarakhand 2023 LiveLaw Sc 341
Thank You