Dowry, domestic violence grim reality of our times: Delhi HC

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma in her ruling delivered on Friday, remarked that dowry demands not only strip women of their dignity but, in many cases, also claim their lives.

Incidents of dowry death serve as grim reminders that the battle against deep-rooted social evils such as dowry and domestic violence is far from over, even to this day, the Delhi High Court observed while rejecting the anticipatory bail pleas of a father-in-law and brother-in-law in a dowry death case.

The court was dealing with a plea filed by the deceased’s brother-in-law, sister-in-law and father-in-law seeking anticipatory bail.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma in her ruling delivered on Friday, remarked that dowry demands not only strip women of their dignity but, in many cases, also claim their lives.

“It is profoundly unfortunate that, even in present times, many women continue to suffer cruelty within their matrimonial homes, for demand of dowry. Such cruelty not only robs women of their dignity but, in many tragic cases, also costs them their lives. These incidents are a stark reminder that the fight against social evils like dowry and domestic violence is far from over,” the court said in its 10-page ruling.

The court was dealing with a plea filed by the deceased’s brother-in-law, sister-in-law and father-in-law seeking anticipatory bail.

The 25-year-old woman died by suicide at her parental home, allegedly driven by continuous dowry demands and harassment by her in-laws, in August this year after she was married in April 2024.

Following the incident, the woman’s mother filed an FIR under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, including charges related to dowry death and cruelty by husband or his relatives.

The mother alleged that the woman’s father-in-law had demanded dowry at the time of marriage, including gold chains, ornaments, and ₹10 lakh in cash, while the brother-in-law continued to harass her for dowry even after marriage.

In their pleas, the individuals had argued that there were no specific allegations against them and they were falsely implicated. They argued that the marital discord was solely between the woman and her husband, and they had no connection with the dispute since they were living on different floors of the house.

The Delhi Police, opposing the bail application, argued that the woman had died under unnatural circumstances within just 15 months of her marriage. They contended that witness statements clearly indicated she had been subjected to harassment and torture over dowry demands.

Consequently, the court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the woman’s father-in-law and brother-in-law, but granted bail to her sister-in-law.