NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday made strong observations against the husband and his family members in a dowry harassment case while hearing an appeal involving the death of a woman by hanging at her matrimonial home. The court remarked, “Why do boys marry girls and then insult them and their families.”
Declining to interfere with the findings of the trial court and the Chhattisgarh High Court, a two-judge bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan upheld the conviction and made sharp oral observations on the conduct described in the case.
Justice Bhuyan questioned the mindset reflected in the allegations, remarking, “These are educated people?”
Justice Nagarathna also made strong remarks, saying, “Why do boys marry girls and then insult them and their families? Let a message go out that they cannot continue insulting the bride and her family.”
She further observed the pattern of financial pressure in matrimonial homes, noting, “Please imagine the pattern of financial pressure in matrimonial homes. The attempt is to squeeze the bride and her family.”
Referring to the allegations on record, she added, “What exactly did the boy’s family say? You people are beggars; you cannot pay. The girl’s family was pleading to save their daughter, and they were being called beggars.”
During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner (husband’s younger brother) argued that his client was wrongly convicted and that the offence under Section 498-A (cruelty) was not made out.
However, the bench was not convinced. The court remarked sharply, “You should be happy that it is only 498-A and only three years.”
According to the prosecution, the case relates to a 2010 incident in Chhattisgarh in which a woman died by suicide within three years of marriage. It was alleged that she was subjected to continuous harassment and dowry demands, including cash and a car, by her husband and in-laws.
The petitioner had approached the Supreme Court challenging his conviction under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code for cruelty and harassment. The Chhattisgarh High Court had earlier upheld the trial court’s verdict.
Upholding the lower court findings, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and refused to interfere in the conviction.