dilution of the anti-dowry law
Through the means of this blog, i would like to draw attention to an order passed by The Supreme Court of India in February this year, which dilutes the anti-dowry law. The court ruled that demand for money and presents from parents of a married girl at the time of birth of her child or for other ceremonies, as is prevalent in society, may be deprecable but cannot be categorised as dowry to make it a punishable offence.
This judgement will have far-reaching implications on the society. This means, if a daughter-in-law is being harassed for customary gifts by parents-in-law, then they could be booked under ordinary penal provisions but not under the tough anti-dowry laws providing stringent punishments.
The SC is of the view that that not all demands from the parents-in-law can be categorised as ‘dowry’ under the Dowry Prohibition Act. It said though the Act covers payment of money or articles during, before or after marriage by the girl’s parent to her in-laws, the cash and presents given had to have a link with the marriage to become objectionable in law.
Also, another outdated clause in the anti-dowry law that needs modification is the 7 year cap. As of now, an “unnatural death” involving burns or bodily injuries “soon before demise” is mandatorily investigated for dowry harassment if it occurs within seven years of marriage. The law should mandate such an investigation to be ordered at any stage of married life. This is apart from cases of abuse, physical harm and harassment which should also be registered at any time during a marriage under the domestic violence act.
The punishment for taking or abetting dowry has not been changed for a long time from imprisonment for a term not less than five years and a fine not less than Rs 15,000 or the amount of the value of dowry whichever is more. I strongly believe that the act of taking or abetting dowry calls for stronger sentence. On the other hand, the wife’s family which gives dowry also faces punishment — imprisonment not less than one year and with a fine of Rs 15,000. If a person can prove he was compelled to give dowry, he could escape punishment altogether. I feel that status-quo needs to be maintained as far as this clause of punishing the wife’s family is concerned, so that it continues to act as a deterrent to people thinking of giving dowry in order to end the plight of their daughter. They should be compelled to employ other means to obtain justice, rather than succumb to the demands of dowry abettors.
6,707 cases of dowry death and harassment for dowry came to light in 2005. We are still not nearing the end as far as the menace of domestic violence is concerned. In the light of this striking evidence, i salute the ‘bell bajao’ campaign initiative started by breakthrough.
Tagged domestic violence, Law
Share this:
