Prosecution Of Honor Killings And Dowry Death Cases
🏛️ 1. Introduction
(a) Honour Killings
An honour killing is the murder of a family or community member (usually a woman) who is perceived to have brought dishonour to the family, often by marrying against family wishes, engaging in premarital or extramarital relations, or defying social norms.
Such acts are rooted in patriarchal and caste-based ideologies, violating the victim’s fundamental rights under Article 14 (Equality), Article 15 (Non-discrimination), and Article 21 (Right to Life) of the Indian Constitution.
No specific section in the IPC exclusively defines honour killing, so prosecution is carried out under:
Section 302 IPC (Murder)
Section 120B IPC (Criminal Conspiracy)
Section 34 IPC (Common Intention)
Sections 107–109 IPC (Abetment)
(b) Dowry Deaths
A dowry death refers to the unnatural death of a woman (by burns, suicide, or other injuries) within seven years of marriage, where it is shown that she was subjected to cruelty or harassment for dowry.
Relevant provisions:
Section 304B IPC – Dowry Death
Section 498A IPC – Cruelty by Husband or Relatives
Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act – Presumption as to Dowry Death
⚖️ 2. Prosecution and Legal Provisions
(a) Honour Killings
Treated as murder (Section 302 IPC) — punishable with death or life imprisonment.
If multiple persons conspire (family members or community panchayat), they can be booked under Sections 120B and 34 IPC.
Courts have also held that Khap Panchayats or community councils ordering such killings are illegal and unconstitutional.
(b) Dowry Deaths
To prove Section 304B IPC, prosecution must establish:
The woman’s death was caused by burns, bodily injury, or occurred otherwise than under normal circumstances.
Within 7 years of marriage.
She was subjected to cruelty or harassment.
For or in connection with dowry demand.
Soon before her death, she faced such cruelty.
Once these are proved, Section 113B of the Evidence Act raises a presumption against the husband and his relatives that they caused the dowry death.
📚 3. Important Case Laws
Case 1: Shakti Vahini v. Union of India (2018) 7 SCC 192
Type: Honour Killing
Facts:
A petition was filed seeking preventive measures against honour killings and Khap Panchayats’ interference in marriages between consenting adults of different castes or communities.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court recognized honour killings as a barbaric and feudal practice.
Directed all states to take preventive, remedial, and punitive measures.
Ordered creation of special cells in each district to protect couples.
Declared that Khap Panchayats have no right to interfere in marriages between consenting adults.
Significance:
This case laid down detailed guidelines to prevent honour killings and ensure police protection for inter-caste or inter-faith couples.
Case 2: Lata Singh v. State of U.P. (2006) 5 SCC 475
Type: Honour Killing (Inter-caste Marriage)
Facts:
Lata Singh, a major woman, married a man from another caste. Her family filed false criminal cases against her husband and his relatives.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court held that a major woman has the right to marry anyone of her choice.
Condemned honour killings and harassment by family members.
Directed police and administration to protect inter-caste and inter-religious couples.
Warned of strict action against those committing violence in the name of family or caste honour.
Significance:
Reaffirmed individual liberty and freedom of marriage under Article 21.
Case 3: Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2011) 6 SCC 396
Type: Honour Killing
Facts:
The accused father killed his daughter because she was living with her uncle (the father’s brother) — considered a shameful act in their community.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court held that such killings are cold-blooded murders and must be punished with the severest penalty.
Observed that “honour killings have no place in a civilized society.”
Upheld the father’s life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC.
Significance:
It was a landmark moral condemnation of honour killings, treating them strictly as murder without any mitigating sympathy.
Case 4: State of Punjab v. Iqbal Singh (1991) 3 SCC 1
Type: Dowry Death
Facts:
A newly married woman died by burns within seven years of marriage. Evidence showed consistent harassment by her husband and in-laws for dowry.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court invoked Section 304B IPC (Dowry Death).
Held that prosecution successfully proved cruelty “soon before her death.”
Confirmed conviction of husband and relatives under Sections 304B and 498A IPC.
Significance:
This case clarified that the temporal proximity (“soon before death”) between cruelty and death is crucial for conviction under Section 304B IPC.
Case 5: Kaliyaperumal v. State of Tamil Nadu (2004) 9 SCC 157
Type: Dowry Death
Facts:
A woman died within two years of marriage due to poisoning. There was consistent evidence of dowry harassment by her husband and in-laws.
Judgment:
The Court explained the essential ingredients of Section 304B IPC.
Held that once prosecution proves death under abnormal circumstances within 7 years and cruelty for dowry, burden shifts to the accused to rebut presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act.
Convicted the husband and relatives.
Significance:
Laid down definitive guidelines for courts on how to apply Section 304B IPC and presumptions under Section 113B.
Case 6: Satbir Singh v. State of Haryana (2021) 6 SCC 1
Type: Dowry Death
Facts:
A woman died of burns; her parents alleged continuous dowry harassment. The High Court acquitted the accused, but the Supreme Court re-examined the evidence.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court emphasized Section 113B presumption is mandatory once the foundational facts are proved.
Stated that “soon before her death” must be understood pragmatically, not necessarily immediately before death.
Restored conviction of the husband and in-laws.
Significance:
Clarified the evidentiary presumption in dowry death cases and strengthened women’s protection.
🧾 4. Comparative Summary
| Aspect | Honour Killing | Dowry Death |
|---|---|---|
| Relevant IPC Section | 302, 120B, 34 | 304B, 498A |
| Nature of Crime | Murder to preserve family/caste honour | Death due to harassment for dowry |
| Victim | Usually woman or couple defying family norms | Married woman within 7 years of marriage |
| Evidence Required | Proof of murder, motive of “honour” | Death under unnatural circumstances + dowry harassment |
| Presumption of Guilt | No statutory presumption | Section 113B Evidence Act |
| Leading Case | Shakti Vahini v. Union of India (2018) | Kaliyaperumal v. State of Tamil Nadu (2004) |
🧠 5. Conclusion
The prosecution of honour killings and dowry deaths reflects India’s ongoing struggle against patriarchal violence.
While honour killings are punished under general homicide laws, dowry deaths have specific statutory recognition and presumptions aiding prosecution.
Courts have consistently affirmed that the right to life, liberty, and dignity of women cannot be compromised for false notions of honour or material greed.
Both offences are not merely private tragedies — they are public wrongs against constitutional morality and human rights.
RELATED Blog
0 comments