The
Allahabad High Court recently stated that both bride and groom should maintain
a list of gifts exchanged during marriage ceremonies as stipulated under
Section 3(2) of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Justice Vikram D Chauhan
emphasised that such record-keeping is crucial to thwarting false accusations
of dowry during subsequent disputes.
The
court noted that meticulous documentation of gifts prevents both parties and
their families from levelling baseless allegations of dowry transactions
post-marriage. Additionally, the court highlighted that adherence to the
provisions outlined in the Dowry Prohibition Act aids in resolving disputes by
determining whether alleged dowry exchanges fall within the exceptions
specified under Section 3(2) of the Act.
Section
3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act imposes penalties for giving or taking dowry,
with imprisonment for a minimum of five years and fines starting at Rs 50,000
or the equivalent value of the dowry, whichever is higher. However, subsection
(2) of Section 3 exempts gifts presented to the bride or groom during marriage
ceremonies, provided that a detailed list of such gifts is maintained in
accordance with the prescribed rules.
The
court stressed that the legislature intentionally exempted gifts exchanged
during marriage from the definition of dowry under the Act. To avail of this
exemption, it is imperative for the bride and groom to maintain a comprehensive
list of gifts received as per the specified rules.
Furthermore,
the court highlighted the role of the Dowry Prohibition (Maintenance of Lists
of Presents to the Bride and Bridegroom) Rules, 1985, in governing the
maintenance of gift lists. These rules, formulated by the Central Government,
aim to ensure that the Indian tradition of exchanging gifts during weddings is
upheld while also serving as a means to address dowry-related allegations in matrimonial
disputes.
In
the case under consideration, neither party had submitted a gift list as
required by Section 3(2) of the Dowry Prohibition Act and the corresponding
Rules of 1985. The court stressed the need for strict implementation of Section
3(2) to prevent frivolous litigation and called upon the State Government to
clarify how the provision is being enforced.
Additionally,
the court directed the Chief Secretary of the State of Uttar Pradesh to provide
information regarding the appointment of Dowry Prohibition Officers,
emphasising the need for their appointment in light of the rising number of
dowry cases.
The
court requested the State to clarify whether marriage registration officers are
collecting and maintaining lists of presents as mandated by the Dowry
Prohibition Rules of 1985. This measure aims to facilitate the verification of
gifts in the event of disputes over dowry allegations.
The
case is scheduled for further hearing on May 23.