In continuance of numerous dowry deaths over the years, yet another girl lost her life to the exorbitant dowry demand of the groom and his family. In Kerala’s Thiruvananthapuram, a 26-year-old doctor named Shahana died by suicide after her boyfriend Dr EA Ruvais refused to have nikah with her as her family could not fulfil the dowry demand. Shahana, a resident doctor in the surgery department of the Thiruvananthapuram Medical College, was found dead in her rented room on December 5.
Dr Ruvais proposed Shahana for marriage but with an added “terms and conditions apply” as he demanded a substantial dowry. It has been alleged that Ruvais’s family had demanded gold, land and a BMW car as dowry. Being parents of a girl, Shahana’s family gave into the dowry demands and agreed to ‘gift’ 50 sovereigns of gold, properties worth Rs 50 lakhs, and a car. Even after this, Shahana’s family could not satiate the unending greed of the groom’s family and the 26-year-old girl was left heartbroken, emotionally fragile and humiliated after the man who proposed to her for marriage walked away as he could not fetch ‘enough’ dowry.
In July this year, a man named Atiq Ahmed had threatened to burn his wife Saba Bano alive over failing to give dowry in Uttar Pradesh’s Kaushambi. After perpetual physical and mental abuse, Atiq Ahmed gave triple talaq to his wife as she was unable to give Rs 5 lakh and other ‘gifts’ to her husband and in-laws.
Back in February 2021, a 23-year-old girl named Ayesha had committed suicide by jumping off the Sabarmati river in Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Before ending her life, Ayesha had recorded a video in which she revealed her ordeal accusing her husband Arif Khan and his family of dowry, harassment and domestic violence. Her video back then had sparked discussion of the prevalence of dowry and related abuse even in present times. Last year, the court sentenced Ayesha’s husband Arif to 10 years in prison.
Dowry: The perennial malediction on marriages in India
It is paramount to understand that the practice of dowry is neither new nor limited to any particular religion. This social evil extends over all religions in some or the other manner. This perennial abuse of women and their families in the name of seeking ‘gifts’ has claimed numerous lives over the years. An IndiaToday report from the year 1988 highlighted that in 1986 around 1319 dowry deaths were reported with cases concentrated not in one or two states or limited to any particular religion but from Jammu and Kashmir to Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and so on.
“For the first time, 10 were reported burned in Jammu & Kashmir last year. The southward spread has been much more dramatic. In Andhra Pradesh, the number reported rose sixfold from 13 in 1985 to 79 in 1986. And by July of 1987, the year’s tally had already leapt to 166. In Tamil Nadu, the graph jumped threefold from 12 in 1985 to 38 in 1986. And these government figures might be only the tip of the iceberg,” the report reads highlighting dowry death cases pertaining to adherents of different religions.
A World Bank blog published in 2021 says that dowry is not just a Hindu phenomenon rather average net dowry in Muslim marriages is only slightly lower than among Hindus. In contrast, Christians and Sikhs exhibited a striking increase in dowry over the period of 1960-2008, leading to higher average dowries than Hindus and Muslims.
Despite the laws in place, the giving and taking of dowry and related violence has been prevalent in the country. According to a Parliamentary Committee report published in 2021 and an NCRB report issued in the same year, in 2021 alone, 6,589 dowry-related deaths were recorded, as well as 13,568 dowry-related incidents, and 136,243 incidents of cruelty by husbands or their relatives.
Recently, the NCRB published its annual crime report for the year 2022. The report said that 13,479 cases were registered in 2022 under the Dowry Prohibition Act, of 1961. During the same period in 2022, 6,450 dowry deaths were reported. The number of dowry deaths has fallen by 4.5% in 2022, while the number of cases registered under the Dowry Prohibition Act of 1961 has dropped by 0.6%. Up to 4,594 cases (the highest in the country) were registered in Uttar Pradesh.
With 4,807 cases, Uttar Pradesh recorded the highest number of cases reported under the Dowry Prohibition Act, of 1961 followed by Bihar with 3580 cases and, Karnataka with 2,224.
A video recently went viral online featuring a ‘display’ of dowry items at a wedding, including a car, utensils crockery sets, almirah, television set, refrigerator, air conditioner, and whatnot. This boastful impunity demonstrates the prevalence and normalisation of dowry practice even among the ‘educated’ and ‘modern’ masses.
Look at the dowry display pic.twitter.com/DxWSSw9aGc
— Rosy (@rose_k01) November 26, 2023
Usually dismissed as a practice prevalent among so-called upper caste Hindus, giving and receiving of dowry in reality is a menace that transcends caste and religions in addition to regional boundaries. Instead, it reflects a broader cultural phenomenon ingrained in the social fabric. The above discussion demonstrates the same. Dowry deaths often result from the intersection of traditional customs, economic factors, and gender dynamics. The dowry system fosters the idea that a woman’s worth is judged by the monetary assets she brings into a marriage, resulting in their commodification. This dehumanising behaviour crosses religious bounds as seen in countless such cases over the decades.
To tackle this issue comprehensively, society must prioritise education and awareness efforts that combat archaic mindsets. Furthermore, severe enforcement of dowry prohibition laws is required to dissuade those who commit dowry-related violence. Moreover, the authorities must rigorously investigate and prosecute cases of dowry-related violence.
To summarise, combating dowry-related deaths in India necessitates a diversified approach that recognises the issue as a society problem rather than that of a particular caste, religion or regional group. As long as the mindset that “girls are a liability and boys are assets” does not change, this practice will prevail unabated.
