Demand of money for construction of house amounts to dowry .

AUTHOR:

The author of the articles is Rithika Lal Thayat, Final year law student at Government Law College Kozhikode.She is the Legal Director at Expectation Walkers (NGO) and EW Sells,Co-ordinator (Editorial Board) at Legal Boffin.She is also an Editor Trainee at LJRF Voice

INTRODUCTION:

Dowry is an amount of money or property brought by the bride to her husband on their marriage.^[1] It is a custom that finds its roots deeply embedded in our tradition, a concept so treacherous and devilish in nature, it completely undermines the sanctity of marriage. Over the years, death due to dowry has been on an unprecedented rise and women are tortured and subjected to severe cruelty either by her husband or his family or both on nonfulfillment of dowry demands. Over the years several legislations and guidelines have come into effect that aim to protect women and punish those who demand dowry.

ENACTMENT OF LEGISLATION IN RELATION TO DOWRY:

The Dowry Prohibition Act 1961:

The first national legislation passed in India in relation to dowry, the Act intends to prevent the giving and receiving of dowry and contains several preventive and punitive measures. Under the Dowry Prohibition Act, dowry includes property, goods, or money given by either party to the marriage, by the parents of either party, or by anyone else in connection with the marriage.^[1] It was amended twice to widen the meaning of the term “dowry” and enhanced the penalty for violation of the provisions. Section 3 to Section 8 deals with the term of punishment and the fine imposed.

Indian Penal Code 1860

Section 304 B defines the term dowry death as death caused to woman by burns or bodily injury, or under unnatural circumstances within seven years of her marriage ,where it is shown that she was harassed or put to cruelty by husband or his relatives in relation of dowry the punishable with a term of seven years to life imprisonment.

Section 498A contains the provision relating to cruelty subjected to women by their husbands or relatives. It can be in the form of both mental and physical torture. It is made punishable with imprisonment up to three years and fine.

ISSUES IN DISCUSSION:

(i) Whether demand for money for construction of a house amounts to dowry?

Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act defines dowry as 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

1[or any time after the marriage]

2[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.^[1]

Several courts have time and again construed what comes under the ambit of dowry and what can and cannot be considered as dowry. For eg., In the case of Netai Ghosh vs. State of West Bengal (2021) it was held by the apex court that traditional gifts given to bride or bridegroom before or after marriage out of love and affection shall not fall under the term dowry and the same was reiterated by the Kerala High Court in a landmark judgement which held that presents voluntarily given by parents to the bride at the time of her marriage for her welfare,without any kind of pressure from anyone, will not be counted as dowry. Such gifts, which were included in the list as per the relevant sections of the law, cannot be treated as dowry under the ambit of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.^[2]

Widening the scope of what constitutes dowry, on January 11th 2022, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held in the State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Jogendra and Another that demand for money for construction of a house amounts to dowry.

a) Facts of the case:

Burdened by the constant demand of dowry from the husband and his family, four years into marriage the appellant who was five months pregnant committed suicide by setting herself on blaze at the matrimonial home. The trial court acquitted the mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the deceased but convicted both the husband and the father-in-law under sections 304-B, 306 and 498-A IPC and imposed a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life for first offence, RI for seven years for second offence and RI for three years with fine for third offence.
The conviction was based on the testimony of the maternal uncle of the deceased who stated that the respondents had been demanding money from the deceased for constructing a house which her family members were unable to give, as a result of which she was continuously harrassed and subjected to cruelty, finally leading to her committing suicide.
The Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh partially overturned the ruling of the Sessions Court and acquitted father in law under section 304B and 306 IPC and sustained the conviction of the husband under section 498-A IPC but reduced the sentence of Rigorous ⁶Imprisonment for three years to the period already undergone by him.
Aggrieved by this impugned order of the High Court, the State went on an appeal to the Supreme Court.

b) Ratio Decidendi of the High Court:

The Hon’ble High Court while partially overturning the well reasoned judgement of the Sessions court referred and decided, based on the rulings in K.Prema S. Rao and Another vs. Yadla Srinivasa Rao and others, Saro Rama and others v. State of Jharkhand and Appasaheb and Another v. State of Maharashtra.^{^[1]} The court held that demand for construction of a house cannot be treated as a demand for dowry and that it cannot be seen as a sufficient factor propeling the deceased to commit suicide as a result of which the offence under section 304-B cannot be established. Also the respondents were acquitted for the offence under section 306 IPC as the court on a scrutiny of the depositions of the prosecution witnesses, felt that there wasn’t sufficient evidence pointing to the fact that they abetted the deceased to commit suicide.

c) Ratio Decidendi of Supreme Court:

The Hon’ble Supreme Court relied heavily on the statements made by the deceased’s uncle during his cross examination regarding the harassment faced by his niece and the constant demand of Rs. 20,000 by the husband and later on for Rs. 50,000 by the father-in-law for construction of the house, which the deceased’s family could not satisfy.

The court then analysed the ingredients that constitute for attracting the provisions of Section 304-B and dissected the definition of what constitutes “dowry” and referred to the case of Rajinder Singh v Punjab wherein Section 2 of theDowry Act was split into six distinct parts. And accordingly held that:

The word “ dowry” ought to be ascribed an expansive meaning so as to encompass any demand made on a woman, whether in respect of a property or a valuable security of any nature. ^{^[1]}

Since the word “dowry” takes in its ambit any kind of property or valuable security, the Court held that the High Court fell into an error by holding that the demand of money for construction of a house cannot be treated as a dowry demand.

After analysing the incidents of harassment and continuous demand of dowry from the husband and his family, the court held that all the four prerequisites for invoking Section 304-B IPC was satisfied and that the cruelty and harassment leading up to her death was in connection with demand for dowry. The court upheld the judgement of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court in respect of both the respondents under Section 304-B and Section 498-A , however reduced the RI for life to RI for seven years.

4. CONCLUSION:

Dowry is a vice that grips a married women’s matrimonial happiness, subjecting her into an impending torture. What began as a means to ensure one’s daughter, a content married life, soon began to be the reason for her death. It has become the need of the hour to tackle this social issue by more than a few reforms and laws. This judgment of the apex court has expanded the very narrow definition of what comes under the purview of “dowr” so as to affirm what constitutes dowry death. While this stands as a deterrent to all those who subject their spouses to cruelty and harassment and get out on technicalities, this is also an example of how the law has to be expanded beyond its exact meaning and evolve according to societal changes. However, having said that, it took the court 20 or so years to arrive at a decision, a glaring fact that tells us justice will prevail, but at a cost.

ENDNOTES:

Demand of money for construction of house amounts to dowry .

Subscribe Now