Daily Current Affairs for UPSC : 25 Dec 2025

In the present case, a 20-year-old girl died as her parents could not meet the demand for a colour television, a motorcycle, and ₹15,000. The judgment by a Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N.K. Singh said “she was apparently only worth that much” for her in-laws.

“This practice of marrying ‘higher up’ traces its origins to caste and kinship along with, to use a colloquial term, the ‘baggage of the samaj’ (society) that comes with it. Since lineage is traced through the patriarchal line, the desire to marry daughters into equal or higher status families ensured that their offspring retained or enhanced the family’s standing. Hypergamy thus became both a social strategy and a religiously sanctioned norm,” Justice Karol, who authored the recent judgment, observed.

Noting that although the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 sought to prohibit the practice, dowry has persisted in society. This social evil, the court said, has slipped through the statutory definition cloaked as “gifts” and “social expectations”.

• “This practice is, at the most basic level, at odds with the values enshrined in the Constitution, i.e., the Constitutional ethos of justice, liberty, and fraternity, and more particularly, Article 14, which guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws, a principle directly undermined by a system that treats women as a source of financial extraction,” Justice Karol said.
• The court also detailed how Muslim families, particularly in urban centres, have begun adopting dowry as a “status marker and as part of competitive marriage negotiations”.
• Dowry has replaced or overshadowed mehr, with Muslim women losing an important bargaining tool to face greater economic vulnerability.
• “This undermines the original Islamic intention of empowering women through property ownership, as the dowry frequently ends up under the control of the husband or his family,” Justice Karol wrote.

• The court directed the States and the Union government to consider changes to educational curricula across levels, reinforcing the Constitutional position that parties to a marriage are equal to one another, and one was not subservient to the other as sought to be established by giving and taking of money and/or articles at the time of marriage.
• The court ordered the prompt appointment of Dowry Prohibition Officers in States, and public access to their details. It said police officers and judicial officers dealing with dowry cases must undergo periodic training and sensitisation.
• The court requested the High Courts to take stock, ascertain the number of pending dowry cases, and enable their expeditious disposal. The court ordered the copy of the judgment to be circulated among the High Courts.