Stiffer dowry law may lead to more abuse

Manoj Mitta / TNN / Jan 3, 2008, 00:04 IST

Text Size

Small
Medium
Large

However well-intentioned, the recommendations made by National Commission for Women (NCW) to make the dowry law more stringent are fraught with the risk of further abuse.

Stiffer dowry law may lead to more abuse

NEW DELHI: However well-intentioned, the recommendations made by National Commission for Women (NCW) to make the dowry law more stringent are fraught with the risk of further abuse. The commission's failure to come up with any proposal to check frivolous or false allegations of dowry harassment under Section 498A IPC flies in the face of repeated attempts by the judiciary to flag the legislature's attention.
Supreme Court, while upholding the constitutionality of Section 498A in 2005 in Sushil Kumar Sharma vs Union of India, conceded that "many instances have come to light" where the complaints of dowry harassment were found to be "not bona fide and have been filed with an oblique motive."
Cautioning that the misuse of the provision could result in a "new legal terrorism" for the affected husbands and their families, SC said the tendency of crying wolf could prove counterproductive to women too as "protection may not be available when the actual wolf appears." The bench headed by Justice Arijit Pasayat said it might "become necessary for the legislature" to find new ways of reducing the susceptibility of Section 498A to abuse.

Since the legislature has so far shown no sign of heeding SC's call for reforming the dowry law, the Delhi high court raised eyebrows two months ago by making a rather sweeping declaration that Section 498A was being used "to convert failed marriages into a crime and people are using this as a tool to extract as much monetary benefit as possible."

NCW's preference to maintain the status quo in this regard also disregards the specific proposal made by the Justice Malimath committee in 2003 that Section 498A be made bailable and compoundable to give a chance to the spouses to come together. Much as it drew flak for seeking to render the provision toothless, the Malimath recommendation could have have been finetuned to deal with the vexed issue.
The lopsided approach adopted by NCW is evident from its proposal of enhancing the minimum punishment for "dowry death" under Section 304B from seven years to 10 years. From a moral view point, it might well seem tenable to treat dowry death at par with the more serious offence of "culpable homicide not amounting to murder" committed with "the intention of causing death or of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death."

But NCW failed to take into account that dowry death carries lesser penalty because of the low bar of evidence required to secure conviction under Section 304B, which contains a presumption of guilt against the accused for causing the death if the wife dies in unnatural circumstances within seven years of the marriage. As a result, NCW's recommendation to increase the presumtion period from seven years to the entire lifetime may only end up prolonging the scope for abuse.
manoj.mitta@timesgroup.com

End of Article