WOMEN’S STATUS AND MARRIAGE PATTERNS IN INDIA

Women in India marry and begin childbearing at young ages.  About 5 percent of
girls between the ages of 10 and 14, slightly over 35 percent of adolescent women
between the ages of 15 and 19 and about 82 percent of young women between the ages of
20 and 24 are married in India (Census of India, 1991).  And because the majority of
Indian births occur within marriage, unraveling issues surrounding women’s status and
marriage patterns is critical for gaining a deeper understanding of the basic family
demography of India and the decision-making power of women within marriages.
Data from the 1998-1999 National Family Health Survey (NFHS2) of India are
used in this paper to examine marriage patterns and their correlates for a sample of
64,855 once-married women between the ages of 25 and 49.  We first describe the basic
characteristics of marriage for the sample and then relate several measures of women’s
status to different dimensions of marriage: age at marriage, child marriage, late marriage,
age difference between spouses, and education difference between spouses.  The net
effects of women’s age, language, caste, standard of living, childhood residence, literacy
status, and stated son preference on these dimensions of marriage are examined.
Since 1978 the legal age at marriage in India is 18 for women, yet 66 percent of
the women in the sample were married before age 18.  The mean age at marriage for the sample is 16.1 years, but varies from a low of 15.4 years in the north and northwestern
regions of India, to a high of 18.3 years in the Himalayan hill states.  We find that 34
percent of women in the sample were married as children (age 14 and younger).
However, there is considerable regional variation in the sample with the northern region
showing 39 percent of women married at age 14 or younger, while the hill states show
only 13 percent of women married as children.  Late marriages (ages 25 and older)
represent only 4 percent nationally and range from 2 percent in the north and east to 9
percent in the hill states.

 The average educational difference between spouses is 2.6 years with noticeable
regional variation.  The hill states have an educational difference between spouses of 1.7
years.   In the north, the average educational difference between spouses is 3.4 years. For
a smaller sample of women (59,860) we find an average age difference between spouses
of 6.1 years.

 Results from the regression analysis of age at marriage show that being literate
and having a literate partner, and having grown up in an urban area have positive effects
on age at marriage.  Women’s age, Hindi speakers (compared to non-Hindi speakers),
and Hindus and Muslims (compared to other religions), members of a scheduled caste or
tribe (compared to other castes), and low and medium standards of living (compared to
high), as well as stated son preference, all have negative effects on age at marriage.
 Results from logistic regression analysis show that older women, Hindi speakers,
Hindus and Muslims, those from low or medium economic class levels, and those with
son preference are more likely than others to have married as a child (age 14 or younger).
Women who are literate, have literate partners, and those who grew up in urban areas are less likely to have married as children.  Caste or tribal membership does not have a
significant effect on child marriage.

 Next, we report results from the regression analysis of age difference between
spouses.  Older women, Hindus and Muslims, and those from low or medium standards
of living have greater age difference from spouses.  However, being literate or having a
literate husband, Hindi speakers, and being a member of a scheduled caste or tribe,
growing up in an urban area, and having a stated son preference all negatively affect age
difference between spouses.

 Results from regression analysis also show that women’s age, husband’s literacy,
Hindi speakers, Hindus and Muslims, those from a scheduled caste or tribe, and son
preference have positive effects on education difference between spouses.  Female
literacy, low or medium standard of living, and growing up in an urban area have
negative effects on education difference between spouses.

 In the final paper we will also report findings relating women’s status and
marriage patterns to their household decision making.  The net effects of measures of
women’s status, along with age at marriage, and age and education difference between
spouses, on the relative power and freedom women have to make household and other
decisions will also be examined.  

Practice of Sati still prevalent in India

The Indian society might have progresses and move forward, but the social evil of Sati continues to haunt us. The shocking incident of a seventy one year old woman performing Sati in Chattisgarh a few days back is an eye opener for all of us.

THE PRACTICE of Sati has been a part of our society for ages with its inception being traced to the time of the Gupta period. Though Sati is illegal and is highly condemned in our society, the act of Sati bring performed in the 21st century has shocked people. Lalmati Verma aged seventy one and a resident of Chechar village in the Raipur district in Chattisgarh. Her husband Shivnandan Verma, a local had died of natural causes. Lalmati had come to the funeral dressed in a new sari. When her husband’s body had been almost burnt and the villagers were about to leave, Lalmati jumped into the pyre and was reduced to ashes in moments. Lalmati’s three sons were totally unaware of their mother’s plans. Lalmati was a member of the Kurmi caste, which is registered in the list of the OBC’s.

Since partition there have been more than forty cases of Sati, which have been documented. A majority of the cases have occurred in rural areas, with main reasons being attributed to lack of education and awareness of the law. Sati has always been condemned even at the time of the Mughal rulers, Humayun, Akbar and Aurangzeb had made all attempts to abolish the practice of Sati. Several religious groups have condemned the practice with Guru Nanak, the first Guru of the Sikhs speaking out against it. Raja Ram Mohan Roy, at the time of independence had fought to abolish the practice of Sati during the time of the freedom struggle.


The government has made its effort to ban the evil practice. After a few incidents that were reported in the 1980’s. The government passed the Sati prevention act of 1987 and also the Rajasthan Sati prevention ordinance of 1987, for most of the Sati acts were performed in regions of Rajasthan. Jaipur was also the last princely state to ban Sati during the British Raj in the year 1846.


The Sati prevention act of 1987, makes it illegal to “abet, glorify or attempt to commit Sati”. Abetment of Sati, includes forcing someone to commit Sati. Abetment can be punished by death sentence or life imprisonment, while glorifying Sati is punishable with one to seven years in prison.

Our society has moved forward by leaps and bounds in the past few decades, but some old practices like Sati are still prevalent in rural India despite several attempts made by the government to ban them. The key is to spread awareness amongst rural areas and make the people realise the evils associated with this practice. Till such cases of Sati continue to be performed we cannot call ourselves a developed nation. It is a shame for our society till this heinous practice continues to go on.

Uproar Over Rajput 'Sati' Wife Emolates Herself On Husband's Funeral Pyre

A pretty, young bride of eight months, Roop Kanwar gained universal fame September 4th at Rajasthan's Deorala Village in northwest India. She became a sati - burning herself to death on her husband's funeral pyre. The reaction in India was an unresolved mixture of shock, admiration, outrage, reverence and embarrassment over the young girl's action. Local police failed to stop the sati. The Indian press called the act "a pagan sacrifice" and "a barbaric incident which blackened India's image in the world." Women's groups demonstrated against the sati all across India, prompting belated government action against Roop's relatives. Yet private opinions, even of prominent politicians, were ambivalent.


Roop's people, the martial Rajputs (who have inspired fear in every invader of India from the Muslims to the British), claim sati as their custom and religious right-the free choice of the widow. Groups of Rajput women marched last month in favor of sati and burned copies of the anti-sati ordinance. The situation remains a stand-off, the Rajputs proceeding with plans to build a temple on the site (they have collected over $230,000), despite a government ban and demanding that those arrested be freed.
Many newspaper reports say the widow was forced into the deed; in a word, murdered. According to all available first-hand reports, however, it was Roop Kanwar's personal decision to commit this form of ritual suicide. "Roop did not weep [upon seeing her husband's body], but she kept saying, 'I will not let you go alone, I am also coming,'" recalled eyewitness and neighbor, Meenakshi Khandelwal. When Roop's relatives tried to talk her out of it, she threatened them with sati shraap-a curse put upon those who would oppose a sati and thought to bring ruin to not only the person but his entire village. The last sati of Deorala-69 years ago-in fact cursed and ruined a man who sought to dissuade her.


Contrary to many press reports, her intentions were not only known before the funeral, but several village elders and holy men came to test her resolve, according to their tradition. Convinced that she had received the power to become a sati from the Goddess, the elders and her in-laws gave their blessings.


Meenakshi Khandelwal said, "I saw Roop dressed in bridal make-up walking along with her husband's body with a coconut in hand. There were about 900 people when the body was taken to the cremation ground. Later, the crowd swelled. It took about an hour for the preparation of the pyre. The girl stood like a rock chanting the Gayatri. Once the pyre was ready, she entered it and sat holding her husband's head in her lap. She ordered Pushpendra Singh, her brother-in-law, to light the pyre. As the fire engulfed her, Roop sat serenely talking to her relatives, not showing any sign of pain."


Many newspapers discounted this as incredible, saying she must have been heavily sedated or pushed in. But courageous willingness is, in fact, a common aspect of satis. A 17th century traveler, Francois Bernier, witnessed a sati where he "could not perceive the slightest indication of pain or even uneasiness in the victim." One witness to Roop's sati, Tej Singh, is quoted in Indian Today as saying, "She is from a well-educated family. Could this kind of woman have been forced? And there are hundreds of widows here whose husbands died even before there were pension schemes. Why were they not forced? She was a woman who believed her husband was a god and there could be no life for her without him."


Grief at the death of a loved one is one of the most common reasons for suicide in all societies. In America the suicide rate is very high, 1 in 2,000 for persons age 15 to 34 whose spouses die. Rejecting the concept that suicide is a sin, most westerners have accepted the idea, according to scholars, that man has a right to take his own life. In the last twenty years, nearly all countries have removed suicide from the law books; aiding a suicide remains a crime.


"Ritual suicide" is done in matters of injustice, honor and love. It is tied to belief in reincarnation and viewed as a sacrifice of the body, not a mortal sin against the soul. East or West, ritual suicide is regarded with respect and reverence. Will anyone forget the Buddhist priests who, in protest of the Vietnam war, burnt themselves to death in the Saigon town square? The Japanese samuri commits hari kari when his honor is lost.
Western reaction to sati-outside of missionary reports-has often been one of awe. The early Portugese traveler Pietro della Valle said, "If I knew [of a lady about to become a Sati], I will not fail to go and see her and honor by my presence her funeral with that compassionate affection, which such a great conjugal fidelity and love seem to deserve."


From its first instances in India, sati has been a practice of the warrior class, or kshatriyas. Later, other castes picked it up. Similar practices are found in the history of other peoples, e.g., American Indian, African, Chinese, Egyptian and Greek.
The first historical mention of sati in India is in the Mahabharata, composed around 300 B.C. There the wives of Lord Krishna-Rukumini, Gandhari, Sahya, Haimavati and Jambavati-ascended the funeral pyre upon his death. Sati is not mentioned in Hindu scriptures until the 1st century A.D. when the minor scripture Vishnusmriti commends it. This scripture claims a sati will be freed from rebirth as a women. Other commentators reject this logic. The hard life of a widow contributed to the occurrence of sati among those who did not feel they could live the required life of renunciation. Sati was formally outlawed in India in 1829 as a result of numerous reports of coercion on the part of relatives who sought to steal the widow's inheritance or avoid supporting her.





Without question, it is the duty of the police to make every effort to stop a sati from occurring. Yet it is doubtful whether such a determined person as Roop Kanwar could be thwarted. It may be impossible to dissuade fighting people such as the Rajputs from their ideals of self-sacrifice-either of their men in battle or their women in the love of their husbands. Western societies are embroiled in the ethical issues of terminal patients seeking "a conscious, dignified death." The customs of sati raise equally perplexing problems. 

SATI In Ancient India

Sati is an ancient ritual that is now outlawed throughout India and the East. Sati, or suttee as the British call it, is the act of a widow cremating herself on her husbands burning funeral pyre (see Embree 98). Sati is a Sanskrit word that has many meanings, one of them meaning goddess. Therefore, when a women would perform this rite, the word sati could mean either the ritual itself, or what the woman would become (a goddess) through performing the ritual (Hawley 30). Western thinking found this ritual appalling, which type of thinking is what led to the passing of the Sati Abolition Law in 1829. Since that time there have still been a few instances of widows performing sati, and by some Hindus today it is still revered as an honorable act (Narasimhan 71). During the time period when sati was allowed, there were many reasons why a widow chose it over a solitary life. There are also many reasons why it was outlawed, and cases of sati being performed since then.


Hindus have many rituals, and are particularly detailed in the way in which the rituals are performed. One account of how the ritual of sati is performed started with the men, usually Brahmins and male relatives, preparing the pyre. Women then washed the widow’s feet, and the Priests would explain to her what to do. She would lay down alongside her husband, with “her right hand under his neck, his right arm over hers, and his right leg over her” and the male relatives would then start the fire (Leslie 179). Throughout this, the women would continue wearing bangles, or jewelry of some sort. The wearing of such things shows that one is married, and in this case is a symbol of the women’s continuing state of marriage (Hawley 35).
There are cases in which women did not voluntarily perform sati, but this was uncommon. There are other uncommon cases in which a woman would want to perform sati, but be persuaded not to by friends and family. In another account, a Queen attempts to explain to her grieving son, why it is that she is performing sati, while trying to convince him to let her do it:
“Daughter, spouse, mother of heroes, how otherwise could such a woman as I, whose price was
valour, act?... Thus every limb has fulfilled its mission I have spent my store of good works, what more should I look to... I cannot endure… to make unavailing lamentations for a burnt husband. Going before, like the dust of your father’s feet, to announce his coming to the heavens,
I shall be high-esteemed of the hero-loving spouses of the gods. Therefore dishonour me no more . . . with opposition to my hearts desire” (Embree 99-100).


The ritual of sati stemmed from the negative attitudes towards being a widow. The idea of sati is not a monolithic one, and many books of scripture have different ideas on it. Some ancient scriptures, however, do promote sati due to the negativity of becoming a widow. One such scripture is, The Laws of Manu, which is an ancient book of Hindu scripture that dictates how individuals should act. In this book of scripture it is taught that widows cannot speak the
name of another man. If a widow remarries she is disgracing herself and her Lord (Wilkins 211). Hindu widows wore white saris, little or no jewelry and removed the red spot on their forehead that had been worn since marriage (Ganeri 7). There are customs by which every Hindu lives that are written in such books of scripture as The Laws of Manu. Some customs by which widows had to live by were, only eating one meal per day, and two days a month going completely without food (Wilkins 211). Even in the year 1987, over one hundred years since the abolition of sati, one Hindu woman stated that it was better to die than to be a widow. She said that widows are not permitted to wear nice clothes or eat good food and must stay inside for the
rest of their life (Narasimhan 28). Pativrata is a Sanskrit term for the ideal woman and
encompasses the thought that “if her [the pativrata] husband . . . is dead, she should also die” (Narasimhan 29). Although there are many negative factors to widowhood, performing sati gives you a positive way in which to deal with becoming a widow. A women who performs sati is not only honored and respected, but is thought to dwell in heaven for thirty-five million years [This number comes from the fact that she should reside in heaven for as many years as she has hairs on her head, which is thought to be 35, 000, 000 (Wilkins, 1887)] (Wilkins 223). When one performs sati, she becomes a goddess and may thereafter be worshipped as one, by having shrines or temples built in her honor (Hawley 34-36).


During the Reform Period in India, Ram Mohon Roy was a very influential man, and son of a wealthy Bengali Brahmin family. He lived from 1772-1833, during which time the British were heavily influencing Indian culture, education and society. Ram Mohon Roy was the founder of a famous society called the Brahmo Samaj (The Encyclopedia of Religion 479). Throughout Ram Mohon Roy’s lifetime he rejected many traditional Hindu beliefs. “He was the first Indian to publicly denounce [sati]” (Narasimhan 102). His ideas of widow remarriage and forbiddance of sati were highly influential in its future abolition. Many European travelers also witnessed sati and believed that it was inhumane (Embree 98). In 1829, Lord William Cavendish Bentick passed the Sati Abolition Law of 1829 prohibiting this ritual [This act was also called the Bengal Regulation XVII of 1829.]. Despite this law, there were still occurrences of sati, leading to the Sati Prohibition Act of 1987 (Narasimhan 53).

SATI

Sati – “Sati” means a virtuous woman. A woman who dies             burning herself on her husband’s funeral fire was  considered most virtuous, & was believed to directly go to heaven. Sati is the traditional Hindu practice of a widow immolating herself her husband’s funeral pyre.

             Sati was prevalent among certain sects of the              society in ancient India. There are mot many instances of remarriage of widows in Indian history & it is believed that women preferred death to the cursed life a widow.
             A large number of Sati committed just after the              war (like Johar in Rajasthan), when the women must have died to protect their honor from the invading enemies after their men perished in the battle field.

           Today Sati is illegal. The country owes the abolition of this deplorable practice to the crusading efforts of Raja Ram Mohan Roy, the 18th century social reformer. The ritual of Sati was banned by the   British Government .

What is Sati?

Definition:

Sati: The ancient Indian practice of burning a widow on her

 husband's funeral pyre, or burying her alive in his grave.

According to tradition, sati was supposed to be voluntary, and

often it was seen as the proper final act of a marriage.

However, many accounts exist of women who were forced to

 go through with the rite. They may have been drugged, or tied up 

before being placed on the pyre or into the grave.

In addition, strong societal pressure was exerted on women to

 accept sati, particularly if they had no surviving children to support

 them. A widow had no social standing in traditional society, and 

was considered a drag on resources.

During the colonial period, Britain tried to stamp out the

 practice of sati. It still occurs from time to time, however, 

particularly in rural areas of Rajastan.

The term "sati" can also apply to the widow who commits the

 act.The word "sati" comes from the feminine present participle of 

the Sanskrit word asti, meaning "she is true / pure."

  

Dowry System In India

Our society is suffering from many social evils at the moment. The dowry system is prevalent virtually in all parts of India. Dowry has been defined by a young lady as "the price paid by the parents for getting their daughters the post of a daughter-in-law". Parents pay huge sums of money so that their daughters may secure a satis­factory and permanent post. Unfortunately, the whole affair has assured the proportions of a scandal. The groom's parents try to extract the maximum from a matrimonial alliance. They insist on receiving huge amount of cash, luxury items like television sets, VCR's, refrigerators, cars, scooters and in certain cases even houses. Cases of harassment of young brides and bride burning on account of in-adequate dowry have multiplied during the recent years.

Dowry system is deeply ingrained in the social texture of our country. Giving away a daughter in marriage is called 'Kanyadan'. Traditionally, no 'daan' was considered to be valid unless accom­panied with 'dakshina'. The dowry was supposed to be the 'dakshina' to validate the 'Kanyadan' Kings used to give even parts of their kingdom in dowry, common people gave a dowry consisting of arti­cles of household utility and some cash. Since a girl enjoyed no right to the parental property, the system carried some kind of a moral justification also.

In modern societies marriage is an established custom designed to make society a most dependable and indivisible unit. In the present generations, however, it has come under increasing pressure and criticism from many quarters and its very existence is threatened.

In modern times, however, dowry is a contemptible social evil. It reduces the sacred institution of marriage to a business tran­saction. It degrades a young maiden to the level of a saleable commodity. Poor people have to incur heavy debts to provide their daughter with a handsome dowry. This wrecks them financially. Some people resort to unfair means to meet dowry demands, which poses a grave threat to the moral values of the society. The daugh­ters of poor parents consider themselves a burden on their family and they either opt for a life of disgraceful spinsterhood or commit sui­cide. The dowry system is also an evil since it perpetuates the myth of male superiority. If a bride is harassed for more dowry, it may breed hatred in her mind for her husband and ruin the married life of the couple.

It is very difficult to find a good boy for a girl without paying a high price for the same. Parents of highly educated boys try to demand a large amount of dowry both in cash and in kind.

Thus, whether a parent can pay or not, it has become a com­pulsory present at the time of marriage. It has ruined the lives of many a brilliant girls, because their parents could not afford to give sufficient dowry to satisfy their in-laws. Sometimes the girls commit suicide when their in-laws persecute them to bring more and more money from their parents. Sometimes the greedy husbands along with their parents also kill their wives, when they are not given huge dowry. This accounts for the spurt in cases of bride-burning and violence on women.

The supporter of the dowry system give numerous arguments to justify it. According to them, it is a fine method of setting up an establishment for the newly weds. The second argument is that since the bride's parents are quite choosy about the groom's income, his qualifications, this property, why shouldn't the groom get a price for what he has to offer ? They think that marriage is a girls' life insurance and so the dowry is the premium. Thirdly, the suppor­ters of this system argue, a girl carrying with her a respectable dowry feels confident while entering her in-law's house while a girl without dowry feels uneasy and apprehensive.

Let us talk about the Hindu marriage system and delve into the topic of dowry and bride-burning in India for which we are assembled here. No one doubts that is a most heinous crime perpetrated by greedy persons who want to get rich through the marriage of their sons. The custom of dowry is prevalent in many parts of India where it is regarded only as a voluntary gift to the bride by the parents, friends and relatives and there are no strings attached. In many cases, grooms do not take anything as dowry. Gifts are accepted as a token of love. But when the parents of the groom extort money from the parents of the bride as a recompense for marrying their daughter to their son, keep on increasing the demands after the wedding, finally kill the bride for the outstanding amount, and yet go unpunished by the administrative, legal and judicial system of the country, this must be a product of the overall moral decadence of the country. This is an extremely serious matter. I congratulate the organizers of The First International Conference on Dowry and Bride-Burning in India for focussing the attention of the world on this abominable crime in India.


In Hinduism, marriage is a very holy event in life. According to the Vedic rites, the groom and the bride are trained to fast on the day of their wedding, so that they may concentrate on the spiritual meanings of the marriage commitments. How the despicable practice of demanding dowry found its way into the pious and solemn custom of a Hindu marriage is extremely puzzling. To find an objective answer, one must analyze the history of Hindu people in those parts of India where dowry and bride-burning still continue in full force. In his book, Mr. H. B. Thakur has tried to diagnose the reasons for the degeneration of the Hindu society due to the historical forces of those areas, and their effects. One of the effects was the proliferation of child marriage in North India during the medieval period which was very rare in Vedic India. It became a compulsory practice for the Hindus in North India who lost their independence in the medieval period and could not protect their grown-up daughters. The only way to save the family honor was to marry off the daughter to someone else's family who would be responsible for her protection. Child marriage abounded, and so did the practice of bidding for dowry.

Social reformers of the nineteenth and early twentieth cen­turies clearly perceived the pernicious effects of the dowry system and assiduously strove for its abolition. Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Ishwar Chander Vidya Sagar and Mahatma Gandhi, to name only a few, tried their best to mobilize public opinion against the system. Gandhiji unequivocally expressed his views against dowry when he said "Any Youngman who makes dowry a condition of marriage discredits his education and his country and dishonors womanhood."

From time to time the Government has enacted legislation to extricate the Indian Society from this great social evil. In 1961, it enacted the Dowry Prohibition Act, but the act proved utterly in effective. Instead of showing signs of subsiding, the system took deeper roots, Recently giving or taking of dowry has been made a legally cognizable offence punishable by imprisonment up to two years.

Now there is a great demand by the people that this evil of dowry should be eradicated completely. Many girls and boys are taking pledge that they will not accept dowry at the time of their marriage. Their is no doubt that until and unless the educated youths of the country come forward to abolish this evil from our society nothing tangible can be done to eliminate it once for ever. It is quite heartening to note that during the last few months a strong public opinion has been created against this evil.

In reality a strong propaganda should be started against this evil by all responsible persons in the society. The young men and women should stage demonstrations against those persons who give or take dowry. Of course, the Government should also pass stringent laws against this evil but social evils can only be abolished with the active co-operation of the society.

The youth can definitely play a key role in eradicating this evil practice. Young boys should take a pledge that they will neither demand a dowry nor accept it, and young girls should be resolved not to give their consent to marriage with a boy who demands a dowry. If more and more girls are educated and made economically independent, it will accelerate the process. More love marriages and more inter-caste and inter-provincial marriages should also prove helpful. The cases of 'dowry-free’ marriages should make the prominent news-item in the news bulletin. This would encourage the youth to take the lead.

THE DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, 1961

(Act No. 28 of 1961)
(20th May, 1961)


An Act to prohibit the giving or taking of dowry
Be it enacted by Parliament in the Twelfth Year of the Republic of India as follows:
1. Short title, extent and commencement.-(1) This Act may be called the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
It extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir.
It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, appoint.
2. Definition of `dowry’.-In this 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 said parties but does not include dower or mahr in the case of persons to whom the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) applies.


***
Explanation II.-The expression `valuable security’ has the same meaning as in Sec. 30 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).
3. Penalty for giving or taking dowry.-(1) If any person, after the commencement of this Act, gives or takes or abets the giving or taking of dowry, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years, and with the fine which shall not be less than fifteen thousand rupees or the amount of the value of such dowry, whichever is more:
Provided that the Court may, for adequate and special reasons to be recorded in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than five years.
* * * Explanation I omitted by Sec.2 w.e.f 2nd October, 1985
(2)Nothing in sub-section (1) shall apply to or, in relation to,-
presents which are given at the time of a marriage to the bride (without nay demand having been made in that behalf):
Provided that such presents are entered in list maintained in accordance with rule made under this Act;


presents which are given at the time of marriage to the bridegroom (without any demand having been made in that behalf):
Provided that such presents are entered in a list maintained in accordance with rules made under this Act;
Provided further that where such presents are made by or on behalf of the bride or any person related to the bride, such presents are of a customary nature and the value thereof is not excessive having regard to the financial status of the person by whom, or on whose behalf, such presents are given.
4. Penalty for demanding dowry.- If any person demands directly or indirectly, from the parents or other relatives or guardian of a bride or bridegroom as the case may be, any dowry, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to two years and with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees:
Provided that the Court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than six months.
4-A. Ban on advertisement.- If any person-
(a) offers, through any advertisement in any newspaper, periodical, journal or through any other media any share in his property or of any money or both as a share in any business or other interest as consideration for the marriage of his son or daughter or any other relative,
(b) prints or publishes or circulates any advertisement referred to Cl. (a), he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months, but which may extend to five years , or with fine which may extend to fifteen thousand rupees:
Provided that the Court may, for adequate and special reasons to be recorded in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than six months.
5. Agreement for giving or taking dowry to be void.- Any agreement for the giving or taking of dowry shall be void.


6. Dowry to be for the benefit of the wife or heirs.- (1) Where any dowry is received by any person other than the woman in connection with whose marriage it is given, that person shall transfer it to the woman –
(a) if the dowry was received before marriage, within three months after the date of marriage; or
(b) if the dowry was received at the time of or after the marriage within three months after the date of its receipt; or
(c) if the dowry was received when the woman was a minor, within three months after she has attained the age of eighteen years, and pending such transfer, shall hold it in trust for the benefit of the woman.
(2) If any person fails to transfer any property as required by sub-section (1) within the time limit specified therefor or as required by sub-section(3), he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months, but which may extend two years or with fine which shall not be less than five thousand rupees, but which may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both.
(3) Where the woman entitled to any property under sub-section (1) dies before receiving it, the heirs of the woman shall be entitled to claim it from the person holding it for the time being:
Provided that where such woman dies within seven years of her marriage, otherwise than due to natural causes, such property shall-
if she has no children, be transferred to her parents, or
if she has children, be transferred to such children and pending such transfer, be held in trust for such children.
(3-A) Where a person convicted under sub-section (2) for failure to transfer any property as required by sub-section (1)or sub-section (3) has not, before his conviction under that sub-section, transferred such property to the women entitled thereto or, as the case may be, her heirs, parents or children, the Court shall, in addition to awarding punishment under that sub-section, direct, by order in writing, that such person shall transfer the property to such woman, or as the case may be, her heirs, parents or children within such period as may be specified in the order, and if such person fails to comply with the direction within the period so specified, an amount equal to the value of the property may be recovered from him as if it were a fine imposed by such Court and paid to such woman, as the case may be, her heirs, parents or children.
(4)Nothing contained in this section shall affect provisions of Sec. 3 or Sec. 4.






7. Cognisance of offences.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2of 1974),-
no Court inferior to that of a Metropolitan magistrate or a Judicial Magistrate of the first class shall try any offence under this Act;
no Court shall take cognizance of an offence under this Act except upon –
(i) its own knowledge or a police report of the facts which constitute such offence, or
(ii) a complaint by the person aggrieved by offence or a parent or other relative of such person, or by any recognized welfare institution or organization:
it shall be lawful for a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Judicial Magistrate of the first class to pass any sentence authorized by this Act on any person convicted of any offence under this Act.
Explanation.- For the purposes of this sub-section, "recognised welfare institution or organization" means a social welfare institution or organization recognized in this behalf by the Central or State Government.
(2) Nothing in Chapter XXXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2of 1974), shall apply to any offence punishable under this Act.)
Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, a statement made by the person aggrieved by the offence shall not subject such person to a prosecution under this Act.
8. Offences to be congnizable for certain purposes and to be bailable and non-compoundable.- (1) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) shall apply to offences under this Act as of they were cognizable offences-
(a) for the purpose of investigation of such offences; and
(b) for the purpose of matters other than-
(i) matters referred to in Sec. 42 of that Code, and
(ii) the arrest of person without a warrant or without an order of a Magistrate.
(2) Every offence under this Act shall be non-bailable and non-compoundable.


8-A. Burden of proof in certain cases.- Where any person is prosecuted for taking or abetting the taking of any dowry under Sec. 3, or the demanding of dowry under Sec.4, the burden of proving that he had not committed an offence under those sections shall be on him.
8-B. Dowry Prohibition Officers.-(1) The State Government may appoint as many Dowry Prohibition Officers as it thinks fit and specify the areas in respect of which they shall exercise their jurisdiction and powers under this Act.
(2) Every Dowry Prohibition Officer shall exercise and perform the following powers and functions, namely, -
(a) to see that the provisions of this Act are complied with;
(b) to prevent, as far as possible, the taking or abetting the taking of, of the demanding of, dowry;
(c) to collect such evidence as may be necessary for the prosecution of persons committing offences under the Act; and
(d) to perform such additional functions as may be assigned to him by the State Government, or as may be specified in the rules made under this Act.
(3) The State Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, confer such powers of a police officer as may be specified in the notification, the Dowry Prohibition Officer who shall exercise such powers subject to such limitations and conditions as may be specified by rules made under this Act.
(4) The State Government may, for the purpose of advising and assisting the Dowry Prohibition Officers in the efficient performance of their functions under this Act, appoint an advisory board consisting of not more than five social welfare workers (out of whom at least two shall be women) from the area in respect of which such Dowry Prohibition Officer exercises jurisdiction under sub-section (1).


9. Power to make rules.- (1) The Central Government may, by notification in the official Gazettee, make rules for carrying out the purposes of this Act.
(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for-
(a) the form and manner in which, and the persons by whom, any list of presents referred to in sub-section (2) of Sec. 3 shall be maintained and all other matters connected therewith; and
(b) the better co-ordination of policy and action with respect to the administration of this Act.
(3)Every rules made under this section shall be laid as soon as may be after it is made before each House of Parliament while it is in session for a total period of thirty days which may be comprised in one session or in two or more successive sessions, and if, before the expiry of the session immediately following the session or the successive sessions aforesaid both Houses agree in making any modification in the rule or both Houses agree that the rule should not be made, the rule shall thereafter have effect only in such modified form or be; of no effect, as the case may be, so, however, that any such modification or annulment shall be without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done under that rule.
10. Power of the State Government to make rules.- The State Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, make rules for carrying out the purposes of this Act.
(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely:
(a) the additional functions to be performed by the Dowry Prohibition Officers under sub-section(2) of Sec. 8-B;
(b) limitations and conditions subject to which a Dowry Prohibition Officer may exercise his functions under sub-section (3) of Sec. 8-B.
(3) Every rule made by the State Government under this section shall be laid as soon as may be after it is made before the State Legislature.




THE DOWRY PROHIBITION (MAINTENANCE OF LISTS OF PRESENTS TO THE BRIDE AND BRIDEGROOM) RULES, 1985


G.S.R. 664 (E), dated 19th August, 1985.- In exercise of the powers conferred by Sec.9 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules, namely:
1. Short title and commencement.-(1) These rules may be called the Dowry Prohibition (Maintenance of Lists of Presents to the Bride and Bridegroom) Rules, 1985.


(2) They shall come into force on the 2nd day of October, 1985, being the date appointed for the coming into force of the Dowry Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 1984 (63 of 1984).


2. Rules in accordance with which lists of presents are to be maintained.-(1) The list of presents which are given at the time of the marriage to the bride shall be maintained by the bride.


(2) The list of present which are given at the time of the marriage to the bridegroom shall be maintained by the bridegroom.
Every list of presents referred to in sub-rule (1) or sub-rule (2),-
(a) shall be prepared at the time of the marriage or as soon as possible after the marriage:


(b) shall be in writing;


(c) shall contain,-


(i) a brief description of each present;
(ii) the approximate value of the present;
(iii)the name of the person who has given the present; and
(iv)where the person giving the present is related to the bride or bridegroom, a description of such relationship;


(d) shall be signed by both the bride and the bridegroom.
Explanation. 1.- Where the bride is unable to sign, she may affix her thumb impression in lieu of her signature after having the list read out to her and obtaining the signature on the list, of the person who has so read out the particulars contained in the list.
Explanation 2.- Where the bridegroom is unable to sign he may affix his thumb-impression in lieu of his signature after having the list read out to him and obtaining the signature on the list of the person who has so read out the particulars contained in the list.


(4) The bride or the bridegroom may, if she or he so desires, obtain on either or both of the lists referred to in sub-rule (1) or sub-rule (2) the signature or signatures of any relations of the bride or the bridegroom or of any other person or persons present at the time of the marriage.

Marriage And Social Issues

Dowry System – A dowry is the money, goods or estate that a woman brings to her husband in marriage . It contrasts with bride price, which is paid to the bride’s parents & dower. The same culture may simultaneously practice both dowry & bride price.

Dowry is derived from the ancient Hindu customs of "kanyadan" and "stridhan". In "kanyadan", the father of the bride offers the father of the groom money or property, etc. whereas for "stridhan", the bride herself gets jewelry and clothes at the time of her marriage, usually from her relatives or friends. In "varadakshina", the father of the bride presents the groom cash or kind. All of these could be done voluntarily and out of affection and love.
The Hindu marriage system is sacramental. According to this system, a marriage is forever, and there is no scope for a separation. Among the various ceremonies previously practiced, the ceremony in front of a "godly" fire ("Yajna" in Sanskrit) has taken over, the antiquated system of "marrying a wife by capture. This form of marriage began the practice of dowry, where originally, the family of the bride would accept gifts and money from the groom's (potential conqueror's) family as an alternative to bloodshed during the capture of the bride. A later modification of this system has paved way for the present dowry system primarily practiced by the society.
The dowry custom continues to rule society. In majority of Indian families the boy has inheritance rights while the girl is given a hefty sum at the time of her marriage in lieu of the Government regulated equal rights for girls in parental property. The evil of the dowry system has spread its tentacles in almost all parts of the country and sections of society. There are several reasons for the prevalence of the dowry system, but the main one is that it is a necessary precondition for marriage. "No dowry, no marriage," is a widespread fear. There has also been an emergence of a feudal mindset with a materialistic attitude in a new globalized economy. The price tag for the groom is now bigger and bolder. The emergence of an affluent middle class, the torchbearer of social change in modern India, is the main factor for the perpetuation of the dowry system. Families arrange most marriages, and a man who does not marry for love learns he can marry for possessions. For this man, and his family, a woman becomes the ticket to shortcut riches through the system of dowry. There are a number of things people desire to have in their own houses but cannot afford; they use the opportunity of a son's marriage to get them. The girl's parents do not protest against the blatant extravaganza, as they regard the alliance as a stepping-stone towards higher social status and better matches for the remaining children. Dowry as a phenomenon has gone beyond the ritual of marriage. Pregnancy, childbirth and all kinds of religious and family functions are occasions when such demands are made. A more sophisticated public image of an extended gifting session has replaced the old system. Now there is demand for receptions in marriage palaces. The trousseau includes designer wear for the bride and groom's family. Chefs are flown in for multi-cuisine wedding dinners. The bride's family usually pays for all this. The rich revel in the exchange of their black money, but this in turn exerts pressure on the other classes to ape them with serious social consequences. The women have become a kind of commodity. It is them who are the worst sufferers because dowry is most often a monetary agreement between two men - the bride's father and the groom. Caste-based practices have only added fuel to the fire. Marriages in political families are arranged to consolidate the caste base for support in electoral politics, so they do not challenge the dowry system. Dowry rituals have now spread even to communities where they were unknown. It has gone to different castes, crossed the boundaries of provinces and education and religion.

Official statistics show a steady rise in dowry crimes. More than 9, 5000 women are killed every year in India over dowry. Bihar and Uttar Pradesh still record the maximum number of dowry crimes, but Bangalore, India's fastest growing city also shows an alarming rise - four women reportedly die every day because of dowry harassment and domestic violence. The cases of dowry torture are the highest accounting for 32.4% of crimes against women in the country. The Dowry Prohibition Act, in force since 1st July 1961, was passed with the purpose of prohibiting the demanding, giving and taking of dowry. In 1980 the Government set up a committee which recommended amendments in the Dowry Prohibition Act and also suggested expanding the definition of dowry and instituting family courts and National Commission for women. Many parliamentary debates led to some amendments in 1983,1984 and 1986.To stop the offences of cruelty by husband or his relatives on the wife, Section 498-A was added in the Indian Penal Code and Section 198-A in the Criminal Procedure Code in the year 1983. The Dowry Prohibition Act clearly stipulates that a person who gives or takes or helps in the giving or taking of dowry can be sentenced to jail for 5 years and fined Rs.15, 000/- or the amount of the value of dowry, whichever is more. The Act also prohibits the giving and taking directly or indirectly any property or valuable security, any amount either in cash of kind, jewelry, articles, properties, etc. in respect of a marriage. The control is provided by stating a limit and names of gifters and their relationship to the married couple to be signed by both sides of parents. In 1986, the Act was amended again, empowering State governments to appoint Dowry Prohibition Officers, who not only had a preventive role but also had powers to collect evidence against people who took dowry. Despite protest by women's organizations, serious activism, legal amendments, special police cells for women, media support and heightened awareness of dowry being a crime, the practice continues unabated on a massive scale. Despite every stigma, dowry continues to be the signature of marriage. Women need real social, political, financial and moral support in their fight against the system. They have to be empowered so that they can take their decisions about their own life by refusing the dowry system.

Dowry is a common practice in many Asian countries. In India, where incidents of bride burning & dowry death acquired notoriety, the payment of a dowry has been prohibited under in 1961 Dowry Prohibition Act in Indian civil law & subsequently by section 304B & 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
In this act, “Dowry” means any property of valuable security given or agreed to be given either directly or indirectly. If any person, after the commencement of this act, gives or takes or abets the giving or taking of dowry, he shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to 6 months or with fine which may be extend to 5 thousand rupees or with both.