Key Court Cases on
Dowry in India.

Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar & Anr.

Supreme Court of India · (2014) 8 SCC 273 · Bench: Chandramauli Kumar Prasad, Pinaki Chandra Ghose JJ

One of the most cited IPC 498A / BNS §85 cases. The Supreme Court expressed concern about automatic arrests under Section 498A and directed police officers to apply their mind before arresting. Courts were instructed not to mechanically grant remand.

The court issued detailed guidelines requiring a checklist before arrest and magistrates to apply their minds to custody applications. This case reflects the tension between protecting victims and preventing misuse of the law.

Rajesh Sharma & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Anr.

Supreme Court of India · (2017) 11 SCC 63 · Bench: A.K. Goel, U.U. Lalit JJ

The court directed the creation of Family Welfare Committees in every district to examine IPC 498A complaints before arrests were made. The order was widely criticised by women's rights groups as diluting protections.

In Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court recalled the Rajesh Sharma directions, restoring the earlier position. The 2018 ruling reinstated police discretion without the committee filter.

Sushil Kumar Sharma v. Union of India

Supreme Court of India · (2005) 6 SCC 281

The petitioner challenged IPC 498A as unconstitutional, alleging widespread misuse. The Supreme Court upheld the provision as constitutional, noting that the possibility of abuse does not render a law invalid. The Court observed that the remedy for misuse is in proper investigation and prosecution, not in striking down the law.

Satvir Singh v. State of Punjab

Supreme Court of India · (2001) 8 SCC 633

Key case on IPC §304B (now BNS §80, Dowry Death). The Court held that the prosecution must establish that: (1) the death occurred within 7 years of marriage; (2) it was by burns, bodily injury, or under suspicious circumstances; and (3) the woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment for dowry soon before her death.

"Soon before" does not mean immediately before. It means the harassment must be proximate and not too remote in time. Once these elements are proven, the burden shifts to the accused under IPC §113B (now BNS §84).

Reema Aggarwal v. Anupam & Ors.

Supreme Court of India · (2004) 3 SCC 199

The Supreme Court held that for IPC §498A (now BNS §85), a woman who was the second wife (where the first marriage was still subsisting) could still claim protection under the section. The section protects any woman who is treated as a wife and subjected to cruelty in connection with dowry demands, regardless of the technical validity of the marriage.

Vimla Devi v. State of Haryana

Supreme Court of India · (2014)

Affirmed that stridhan (gifts received by the wife before or after the marriage, voluntarily given to her) is her absolute property. The husband and in-laws have no right over it. Misappropriating stridhan constitutes a breach of trust under IPC §405 / BNS criminal breach of trust provisions.

Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand

Supreme Court of India · (2010) 7 SCC 667

The Court emphasised that FIRs under IPC 498A must not be filed in a casual and cavalier manner, implicating all relatives of the husband. Each accusation must be examined on its own merits. Courts should be careful that criminal law does not become a tool for settling personal scores.

State of Karnataka v. M. V. Manjunathegowda

Supreme Court of India · (2003) 2 SCC 188

The Supreme Court clarified that in a dowry death case under IPC §304B, the offence is one of strict liability where, once the ingredients are established, the court must convict. The court does not need proof of direct causation if the legal presumption under IPC §113B is invoked.