Supreme Court Dismisses PIL Challenging Provisions Of Dowry Prohibition Act

The Supreme Court today dismissed a public interest litigation challenging validity of Sections 2, 3, 4 and 8A of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 as "adverse to men".

A bench of Justices BR Gavai and K Vinod Chandran passed the order.

During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel pled that he was "concerned about the invalidity of laws". He further submitted that the impugned provisions adversely affect men. In response, Justice Gavai probed as to who the petitioner was. The counsel replied to the same, saying "I am a public spirited person".

Dismissing the PIL, the bench asked the petitioner to approach the Parliament.

Briefly put, the PIL was filed by one Rupshi Singh, impleading the Union of India as well as the Prime Minister. It assailed Sections 2, 3, 4 and 8A of the Dowry Prohibition Act which deal with definition of dowry (Section 2), penalty for giving or taking dowry (Section 3), penalty for demanding dowry (Section 4) and burden of proof in certain cases (Section 8A).

Recently, the Supreme Court dismissed another PIL seeking a review of the anti-dowry laws and domestic cruelty judgments. Following the tragic death of Atul Subhash, allegedly due to harassment by his wife, the petitioner in this case approached the Court seeking to ensure that husbands (and their family members) are not harassed in false cases of domestic violence and under dowry laws. However, the Court dismissed the petition, saying making of law is upto the Parliament.

Case Title: RUPSHI SINGH Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 68/2025