The Supreme Court stated on Monday that this conflict needs to be rectified since it is causing judicial tension. It noted that the social evil of dowries still exists, demonstrating the ineffectiveness of anti-dowry laws, and that women are abusing the law for nefarious purposes.
This issue was brought to light by a bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N K Singh when they found a man and his 94-year-old mother guilty in a dowry killing case involving a 20-year-old girl who burned to death in 2001 for failing to comply with the demand for a color television, a motorcycle, and Rs 15,000 in cash.
After nearly 25 years, the case came to an end when the court sentenced the husband to life in jail but decided not to imprison the mother due to her advanced age.
Since the law had not been successful in stopping the practice, the bench expressed worry over the length of time it had taken to decide the case and issued a number of directives for social measures to address the threat of dowries by raising awareness among young people.
While dowry malpractice is still widespread due to the law's ineffectiveness, Section 498-A of the IPC and the provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act have also been utilized to reveal hidden agendas.
There is a judicial conflict that needs to be resolved immediately because of this oscillation between inefficiency and abuse. While the importance of this urgent resolution cannot be overstated, it is also important to acknowledge that, in the case of the giving and receiving of dowries, this practice regrettably has deep roots in society.
As a result, it is not a matter of quick change but rather requires concentrated effort from all parties involved, including the legislature, law enforcement, judiciary, civil society organizations, etc., the bench stated.
In this instance, a 20-year-old Nasrin was killed within a year of getting married after being set on fire by kerosene oil. Her mother-in-law and husband were found guilty by the trial court, but the Allahabad High Court overturned the verdict and cleared them.
The deceased father's remark that his daughter was happily married served as the basis for the HC ruling. "When the harassment for dowry is proved and so is the fact that such harassment was made soon before her death, then a mere statement of one of the witnesses that she was apparently happy, would not save the Respondents from guilt," the Supreme Court ruled, overturning the HC verdict and finding both accused guilty.
The use of the word "happily" seems to have misled the HC, at least when it comes to PW1's (father's) testimony. It is evident from reading the complete statement as it has been excerpted above that the deceased returned to her marital residence after being convinced and reassured by her father.
He adds that she had been beaten and that a dowry had been demanded. As a result, the tone of the evidence is not affected by the introduction of a single word. The bench stated, "The totality of the evidence is to be understood, taking into account all aspects testified to therein."
Since the current case took 24 years to resolve, the Supreme Court stated that there will be many similar instances and asked all high courts to assess the issue and determine the total number of pending cases pertaining to Sections 304-B and 498-A in order to expedite their resolution.
