WIKIPEDIA

Dowry death
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Dowry deaths refers the deaths of young women who are murdered or driven to suicide by continuous harassment and torture by husbands and in-laws in an effort to extort an increased dowry.
Dowry death is considered one of the many categories of violence against women, alongside rape, bride burning, eve teasing, and acid throwing. It is widespread in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal. Sri Lanka and some regions of Africa. Pakistan has the highest reported rates of dowry-related deaths per 100,000 women in the world.
India[edit]
Most dowry deaths occur when the young woman, unable to bear the harassment and torture, commits suicide. Most of these suicides are by hanging, poisoning or by fire. Sometimes the woman is killed by setting her on fire; this is known as "bride burning", and sometimes disguised as suicide or accident. Suicide and murder are two causes of fatalities in dowry deaths. Death by burning of Indian women have been more frequently attributed to dowry conflicts.[1] In dowry deaths, the groom’s family is perpetrator of murder or suicide.[2]
According to Indian National Crime Record Bureau, in 2010, 8391 dowry death cases were reported across India[3] This means a bride was burned every 90 minutes, or dowry issues cause 1.4 deaths per year per 100,000 women in India.[4][5] For contextual reference, United Nations reports a worldwide average female homicide rate of 3.6 per 100,000 women, and an average of 1.6 homicides per 100,000 women for Northern Europe in 2012.[6] Although India's dowry death rate per 100,000 is lower than equivalent rate for Pakistan and Bangladesh, it is a significant social issue in India.
According to Indian police, every year it receives over 2,500 reports of bride-burning [7] The Indian National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) reports that there were about 8172 dowry death cases registered in India in 2008.[8] Incidents of dowry deaths during the year 2008 (8172) have increased by 14.4 per cent over 1998 level (7146),[9] while India's population grew at 17.6% over the 10 year period.[10] The accuracy of these figures have received a great deal of scrutiny from critics who believe dowry deaths are consistently under-reported[11]
Dowry deaths in India is not limited to Hindus or any specific religion. The ratio of dowry deaths are about the same as the ratio of population in India by religions.[12][13][14]
Prohibition[edit]
The Dowry Prohibition Act, passed in India in 1961, prohibits the request, payment or acceptance of a dowry, "as consideration for the marriage", where "dowry" is defined as a gift demanded or given as a precondition for a marriage. Gifts given without a precondition are not considered dowry, and are legal. Asking or giving of dowry can be punished by an imprisonment of up to six months, or a fine of up to 5000 (US$77, £55 or A$93). It replaced several pieces of anti-dowry legislation that had been enacted by various Indian states.[15] Murder and suicide under compulsion are addressed by India's criminal penal code.
Indian women's rights activists campaigned for more than 40 years to contain dowry deaths, such as the Dowry Prohibition Act 1961 and the more stringent Section 498a of IPC (enacted in 1983). Using the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 (PWDVA) implemented in 2006, a woman can put a stop to the dowry harassment by approaching a domestic violence protection officer.
Global advocacy[edit]
The fight to end dowry deaths in India and other countries has not been confined to these nations' borders. Reports of these incidents have attracted a great deal of public interest and have sparked a global activist movement seeking to end the practice. Of this activist community, the United Nations (UN) has played a pivotal role in ending not only dowry deaths, but violence against women as a whole.
United Nations[edit]
The UN has been an advocate for women's rights since its inception in 1945, explicitly stating so in its Charter’s Preamble,[16] the Universal Declaration of Human Rights[17] (adopted in 1948), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights[18] (adopted in 1966), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights[19] (also adopted in 1966) (these three documents are known collectively as the International Bill of Rights[20]) and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)[21] (2012).
The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), though predominately focused on improving the quality of education available to children globally, has also taken a proactive stance against dowry death. On March 9 (International Women's Day), 2009, at a press conference in Washington D.C., UNICEF's Executive Director, Ann M. Veneman, publicly condemned dowry deaths and the legislative systems which allow the culprits to go unpunished.[22] In 2009 UNICEF launched its first Strategic Priority Action Plan for Gender Equality, which was followed by a second Action Plan in 2010. The aim of these plans has been to make gender equality a higher priority within all international UNICEF programs and functions.[23]
Private organizations[edit]
Amnesty International, in an effort to educate the public, has cited dowry deaths as a major contributor to global violence against women.[24] Also, in their annual human rights evaluations, Amnesty International criticizes India for the occurrences of dowry deaths as well as the impunity provided to its perpetrators.[25]
Human Rights Watch has also criticized the Indian government for its inability to make any progress towards eliminating dowry deaths and its lackluster performance for bringing its perpetrators to justice in 2011.[26] In 2004, the Global Fund for Women launched its "Now or Never" funding project. This campaign hopes to raise funds domestically and consequently finance the efforts of feminist organizations across the globe - including Indian women's rights activists. As of 2007 the Now or Never fund has raised and distributed about $7 million.[27]
A relatively smaller organization, V-Day, has dedicated itself to ending violence against women. By arranging events such as plays, art shows, and workshops in communities and college campuses across the United States, V-Day raises funds and educates the public on topics of gender-based violence including dowry death.[28]
Complications[edit]
Despite a considerable amount of activism both globally and domestically, and the passage of international and domestic laws, dowry deaths remain persistent and their perpetrators consistently go unpunished. Although India officially ratified the terms and conditions of CEDAW in 2000, several organizations including the United Nations and the aforementioned Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch criticize the nation for not adhering to its terms. India’s reluctance to obey CEDAW’s mandates begins began before the nation even ratified it. When originally presented with CEDAW, the Republic of India’s initial report contained two Declaratory Statements and one Reservation. The first Declaratory Statement was written as follows:
"With regard to Article 16 (a call to the end of the discrimination against women in all matters of family and marriage relations) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the government of the Republic of India declares that it shall abide by and ensure these provisions in conformity with its policy of non-interference in the personal affairs of any community without its initiative and consent."
The second Declaratory Statement was written as follows:
“With regard to the [second part of] Article 16 (a mandate requiring the registration of all marriages with the government) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the government of the Republic of India declares that it agrees to the principle of compulsory registration of marriages. However, failure to get the marriage registered, will not invalidate the marriage particularly in India with its variety of customs, religions and level of literacy.”
India's only Reservation was written as follows:
“With regard to Article 29 (the compulsory adjudication of any and all disputes over interpretation to an International court of law) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the government of the Republic of India declares that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of this Article.”[29]
In the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women’s response to India’s Initial Report, several problems were noted. In addition to concerns regarding the Republic of India’s Declarations and Reservation, the Committee found that in matters related to dowry: the initial support lacked sufficient statistical data; India needs to strengthen its laws to prevent acts of violence and harassment for dowry.[30] In addition to these aforementioned nation-specific aspects which make adherence to international laws a complicated process, there also exists a great deal of fundamental obstacles to overcome when a nation adapts international laws for use within its borders. When organizations like the United Nations develop legislation to be applied in several countries the local contexts are ignored. Particularly visible within the realm of human rights legislation, the attempt to create a universal, “one-size-fits-all” notion of social justice leads to friction when the global vision for equality does not cohere perfectly with the already well-established structure of an individual nation.[31] This dilemma is well illustrated by India’s reluctance to ratify CEDAW and its initial Declarations and Reservation.

MANUPATRA

The Problem of Dowry
The problem of Dowry has always been persistent in India and is also rising at a rapid rate and so are the offences related to dowry demand. Dowry demands can go on for years together. The birth of children and a number of customary and religious ceremonies often tend to become the occasions for dowry demands. The inability of the bride’s family to comply with these demands often leads to the daughter-in-law being treated as a pariah and subject to abuse. In the worst cases, wives are simply killed to make way for a new financial transaction—that is, another marriage. The Section 304-B, IPC has been inserted by the Dowry Prohibition Amendment Act, 1986 with a view of combating increased menace of dowry deaths. The Supreme Court in the case of State of Himachal Pradesh v. Nikku Ram(1995)Cri LJ 4184 (SC). interestingly started off the judgment with the words ‘Dowry, dowry and dowry’. The Supreme Court went on to explain why it has mentioned the words ‘dowry’ thrice. This is because demand for dowry is made on three occasions:
(i) before marriage;
(ii) at the time of marriage; and
(iii) after the marriage.
The term dowry is defined in the Dowry Prohibition Act, “dowry” means 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 or any time after the marriage 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.
Greed being limitless, the demands become insatiable in many cases, followed by torture of the girl leading to either suicide in some cases or murder in some. The Supreme Court has explained in this case that though the definition of ‘dowry’ is stated as ‘property or valuable security given or agreed to be given…’ demands made after marriage could also be a part of the consideration because an implied agreement has to be read to give property or valuable securities, even if asked after the marriage as a part of consideration for the marriage when the Dowry Prohibition Act 1961 was enacted, the legislature was well aware of the fact that demands for dowry are made and indeed very often even after the marriage has been solemnized and this demand is founded on the factum of marriage alone. Such demands, therefore, would also be in consideration for marriage.
Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code:
304B. Dowry Death
(1) Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, such death shall be called” dowry death”, and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death.
To invoke Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code the following ingredients are essential:
1. The death of a woman should be caused by burns or bodily injury or otherwise than under normal circumstances.
2. Such a death should have occurred within seven years of her marriage.
3. She must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband.
4. Such cruelty or harassment should be for or in connection with the demand of dowry.
5. Such cruelty or harassment is shown to have been meted out to the woman soon before her death.
One of the important ingredients to attract the provision of dowry death is that the death of the bride must relate to the cruelty or harassment on account of demand for dowry. It is true that Section 304-B does not define cruelty. However, under explanation of Section 113-B of the Evidence Act, by which presumption of dowry can be drawn, it has been provided that ‘cruelty’ shall have the same meaning as in section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. As per requirement of clause (b) appended to section 498-A I.P.C. there should be a nexus between harassment and any unlawful demand for dowry.
If these conditions are fulfilled then a presumption acts under the Indian Evidence Act and the burden of proof shifts on the accused to prove that he is innocent. The section states:
113B. Presumption as to Dowry Death
When the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a women and it is shown that soon before her death such woman had been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry; the court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death.
In the case of State of Punjab v. Iqbal SinghAIR 1991 SC 1532. the Supreme Court clarified the position as to why the necessity to introduce Section 113-B in the Indian Evidence Act was felt –
The legislative intent is clear to curb the menace of dowry deaths, etc. with a firm hand. It must be remembered that since crimes are generally committed in privacy of residential houses and in secrecy, independent and direct evidence is not easy to get. That is why the legislature has by introducing Section 113-B in the Evidence Act tried to strengthen the prosecution hands by permitting a presumption to be raised if certain foundation facts are established and the unfortunate event has taken place within seven years of marriage. This period of seven years is considered to be the turbulent one after which the legislature assumes that the couple would have settled down in life. When the question at issue is whether a person is guilty of dowry death of a woman and the evidence discloses that immediately before her death she was subjected by such person to cruelty and/or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry. Section 113-B, Evidence Act provides that the court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death.
A conjoint reading of Section 113-B of the Act and 304-B I.P.C. shows that there must be material to show that soon before her death the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment. Prosecution has to rule out the possibility of a natural or accidental death so as to bring it within the purview of the ‘death occurring otherwise than in normal circumstances’. ‘Soon before’ is a relative term and it would depend upon circumstances of each case and no straitjacket formula can be laid down as to what would constitute a period soon before the occurrence. There must be existence of a proximate and live link between the effect of cruelty based on dowry demand and the concerned death.
Suggestions and Solutions
1. Awareness : The first and foremost solution to the problem of dowry deaths is awareness, taking into account the illiteracy rates in India most of the women who are subject to the evil of dowry harassment are unaware of their legal rights. Thus the most important task is to create awareness this can be achieved by setting up awareness programmes and initiative in different sections of the society.
2. Education: This is another approach to increase awareness by educating people about such issues and imbibing such social issues in to the curriculum of primary education.
3. Stringent Punishments and speedy trials: Imparting Stringent punishments to the people convicted of such crimes can also help to create a deterrent effect. Also, speedy trial system also works in favour of the victim and acts as a deterrent.
4. Enforcement Mechanisms to be strengthened: We see that in the Indian scenario there are legislations like the Dowry Prohibition Act, the Indian Penal Code and also legislations like The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act are in place but still the problem of dowry demand continues, thus it is high time that the enforcement of these legislations should be strengthened.

Dowry deaths refers the deaths of young women who are murdered or driven to suicide by continuous harassment and torture by husbands and in-laws in an effort to extort an increased dowry. Most dowry deaths occur when the young woman, unable to bear the harassment and torture, commits suicide. Most of these suicides are by hanging, poisoning or by fire. Sometimes the woman is killed by setting her on fire; this is known as "bride burning", and sometimes disguised as suicide or accident. Suicide and murder are two causes of fatalities in dowry deaths. Death by burning of Indian women have been more frequently attributed to dowry conflicts.[1] In dowry deaths, the groom’s family is perpetrator of murder or suicide.[2]

According to Indian National Crime Record Bureau, in 2010, 8391 dowry death cases were reported across India[3] This means a bride was burned every 90 minutes, or dowry issues cause 1.4 deaths per year per 100,000 women in India.[4][5] For contextual reference, United Nations reports a worldwide average female homicide rate of 3.6 per 100,000 women, and an average of 1.6 homicides per 100,000 women for Northern Europe in 2012.[6] Although India's dowry death rate per 100,000 is lower than equivalent rate for Pakistan and Bangladesh, it is a significant social issue in India.

According to Indian police, every year it receives over 2,500 reports of bride-burning [7] The Indian National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) reports that there were about 8172 dowry death cases registered in India in 2008.[8] Incidents of dowry deaths during the year 2008 (8172) have increased by 14.4 per cent over 1998 level (7146),[9] while India's population grew at 17.6% over the 10 year period.[10] The accuracy of these figures have received a great deal of scrutiny from critics who believe dowry deaths are consistently under-reported[11]

Dowry deaths in India is not limited to Hindus or any specific religion. The ratio of dowry deaths are about the same as the ratio of population in India by religions

ESSAY
Dowry started as a form of assistance to a newly married couple in starting their married life. As the time progressed human greed turned it into something that was to be demanded as a right in accordance with the social standing of the groom and his family.
The practice later degenerated further and brides began facing torture after marriage to bring in additional dowry. The torture would many a time escalate into bride burning. The groom and his family would then try to make up a story about a kitchen accident to save their skins.
Though the Dowry Prohibition Act was passed in 1961, the practice had such deep social roots that nothing much could be done and only in few cases could the accused be actually punished primarily because it is very difficult to prove a dowry case.
However, dowry cases have dipped in the recent future but the nightmare is far from over. Brides are still burnt for dowry.
According to the Dowry Prohibition Act any person who gives or takes or abets the giving or taking of dowry, shall be punished with jail or fine or both. An agreement for giving or taking of dowry is void and cannot be enforced.
The dowry can be in any form of property or valuable security given or agreed to be given either directly or indirectly by one party in a marriage to the other party, by the parents of either party or by any other person, to either party or to the other person, at or before or after the marriage.
Besides the Central Dowry Act, the State Governments have enacted their own laws to deal with the dowry problem. For instance, the Himachal Pradesh Government prohibits more than 25 people in a marriage party while Punjab has restricted the number of meals to be served to the guests in the marriage i.e. up to two meals.
The Indian Penal Code also punishes the bride burning, cruelty and torture to brides. Section 498A is a strong provision in this Code. Section 198A of Criminal Procedure Code fixes the procedure for the enforcement of such provisions. The Indian Evidence Act also provides that the accused has to bear the burden of proof.
When a case involves a suicide by a woman within 7 years of marriage, or death of a woman within 7 years of marriage under suspicious circumstances, the court will presume that the accused is guilty of abetment of suicide and the Magistrate can hold an enquiry on his own, apart from the police enquiry.
State (Delhi Administration) v. Laxman Kumar, AIR 1986 SC 250 and Paniben v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1992 SC 1817 are cases where the Supreme Court expressed its concern about the dowry deaths and punished the culprits on the basis of the dying declaration of the victims.