Meharban Singh vs State of J&K

Bansi Lal Bhat, J. - Petitioner filed WPPIL No. 16/2011, for implementation of Dowry Restraint Act, 1960 with further prayer of framing rules

for proper enforcement of the Act. Same was disposed of in terms of judgment dated 15.03.2012 after noticing that the State has undertaken an

exercise to frame the rules and implement the provisions of the Act. Subsequently, petitioner appears to have filed a contempt petition seeking

implementation of the writ Court judgment. Same came to be disposed of in terms of order dated 10.06.2015 with the observation that the Rules

have been framed and same have also been notified.

Grievance of the petitioner in the instant petition is that though rules have been framed and notified by the State, but same are not inconformity

with the provisions of the Act and do not carry out the purpose of the Act. Reference is made to Rule 3 of the Dowry Restraint (Maintenance of

Lists of Presents to the Bride and Bridegroom) Rules, 2012 in terms whereof the couple is required to draw up a list of presents valuing more than

Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) received by them at the time of marriage. It is contended that this rule in fact provides the method and manner

of getting the dowry, thereby goes against the spirit of the Dowry Restraint Act and is liable to be quashed as being ultra vires.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

Admittedly, in terms of SRO 327, dated 9th October, 2012, the State Government has framed Rules in terms of power conferred upon it under

Section 8 of the Dowry Restraint Act, 1960. These rules have been styled as Dowry Restraint (Maintenance of Lists of Presents to the Bride and

Bridegroom) Rules, 2012. Rule 3 thereof provides for drawing up a list of such presents made at the time of marriage, the value whereof exceeds

Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand), received by the bride and bridegroom at the time of marriage. The list is to be drawn immediately after the

solemnising of marriage. Name of the person who has given the present and relationship with either of the spouses has also to be recorded in the

list which is required to be signed by both the spouses.

The rules merely provide for maintaining of a list of presents made to the couple at the time of marriage by their relatives, friends and well

wishers. By no stretch of imagination can these rules be stated to be encouraging or facilitating receiving of dowry. Oriental culture, to be more

precise the Indian traditions, provide for presentation of gifts as a token of love and affection for the bride and bridegroom at the time of

solemnisation of a marriage, by relatives, admirers and friends. Marriage is a great occasion in each individual's life and the same is solemnised with

a lot of fanfare. Guests are served with feasts and gifts are offered to bride and bridegroom by their parents, siblings, relatives, friends and admirers

which is a common feature practised irrespective of Faith or community. Object of the rule provides for drawing up of lists of valuable gifts value

whereof exceeds Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) and the persons from whom such present has emanated, so as to ensure that there is no

demand of dowry. Creating of documentary evidence in the form of a list signed by bride and bridegroom would serve the purpose of keeping the

respective families within the bounds of law. Thus, this rule would discourage demand and giving of dowry and would not promote it, as sought to

be projected by learned counsel for the petitioner.

We are clear in our perception that the object of these rules is to bind the parties to marriage to adhere to the provisions of Dowry Restraint

Act. We find no force in the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner that the rules do not carry out the purpose of the Act. The intention to

implement the provisions of Dowry Restraint, Act is writ large on the face of the rules. Creation of documentary evidence regarding marriage gifts

and presents would discourage the menace of dowry and would not frustrate the object of the Act.

We find no force in the contentions raised in the instant petition. There being no merit in the writ petition, same is dismissed along with connected

MP.