India has some of the strongest anti-dowry laws in the world. It also has some of the highest dowry death rates. Between these two facts lies a graveyard of institutional failure and the bodies of 35,000 women, documented by the National Crime Records Bureau in just five years.
One of the authors, advocate Bhavya Razshree, has spent the last several months confronting this contradiction first-hand. She’s representing a family in Muzaffarpur, Bihar, whose daughter died under suspicious circumstances barely six months after her wedding. The case is marked by compromised forensics, police delays, absconding accused, and physical attacks on the complainant. That case informs this article. But the crisis it reflects is national.
The scale no one wants to confront
India records an average of twenty dowry deaths every single day. Between 2017 and 2022, the National Crime Records Bureau documented over 35,000 such deaths across the country. In 2022 alone, the figure stood at 6,450 registered cases. Researchers consistently warn that the real number is significantly higher, since many deaths are disguised as kitchen accidents, suicides, or simply never reported at all.
The geography of this violence is not random. According to NCRB data, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Rajasthan, and Haryana together account for roughly 80 per cent of all dowry deaths. Bihar recorded over a thousand cases in 2022, making it the second-highest burden state in the country. A World Bank study covering 40,000 marriages in rural India between 1960 and 2008 found that dowry was paid in 95 per cent of all marriages surveyed. It is not a fringe custom. It is the norm.
What makes these numbers worse is the research showing that dowry deaths are systematically underreported. Scholars have found that female dowry deaths account for 40 to 50 per cent of all recorded female homicides in India annually, a proportion that has remained stable for nearly two decades. Evidence gathered by organisations like IndiaSpend suggests that many dowry-related killings are classified as accidental burns or suicides, making the official count a floor, not a ceiling.
Also read: The reel story of Indian weddings—how they are lavish, viral & broke
Why the law isn’t enough
India does not lack legislation on this subject. The Dowry Prohibition Act was enacted in 1961. Section 304-B of the IPC, now Section 80 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, criminalises dowry death with a minimum sentence of seven years, extendable to life imprisonment. Section 498-A of the IPC (now BNS Section 85) punishes cruelty by a husband or his relatives. Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act creates a mandatory presumption of guilt in dowry death cases when certain conditions are met. On paper, these are among the most powerful protections available to women anywhere in the world.
And yet, conviction rates in dowry death cases remain shockingly low. NCRB data from 2022 pegs the national conviction rate in dowry-related violence at just 11 to 17 per cent. In Bihar, convictions were secured in only about 110 out of a thousand reported cases, an 11 per cent success rate. Even Delhi, the national capital, convicted in only 20 out of 180 cases. Of the roughly 7,000 dowry death cases reported each year, only about 4,500 ever result in chargesheets being filed. And by the end of 2022, 67 per cent of pending investigations had been stalled for over six months.
We see this pattern play out in courtrooms across the country. Cases weakened at the FIR stage by poor documentation. Investigations that drag on for months. Witnesses who retract their statements under pressure or exhaustion. Forensic evidence that was never properly collected. Families that run out of resources and resolve. The system does not fail at one point. It fails at every point.
Also read: Indian Muslims are hiding their dowry practice in a Sharia loophole
Beyond criminal law
Understanding why dowry persists requires looking beyond the statute book. Research consistently shows that dowry is deeply embedded in India’s kinship systems, inheritance practices, and gendered economic structures.
In many communities, particularly across the Hindi-speaking belt, dowry functions as a substitute for inheritance. Historically, the Hindu Succession Act of 1956 was biased toward male heirs. Even after the 2005 amendment granted women equal rights to parental property, social practice has been slow to catch up. In regions where families are unwilling to let daughters inherit land, dowry becomes the socially acceptable mechanism for transferring wealth, one that places the bride’s family in a position of permanent subordination.
Peter Mayer, an associate professor of politics at the University of Adelaide, found that dowry murder rates are positively correlated with women’s migration after marriage and larger household sizes. Both of these are features of what was once called BIMARU states (Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh), where village exogamy is common and women are physically and socially isolated from their natal families upon marriage. His research also showed that dowry murder rates are lower in regions where women’s economic value is higher, particularly in southern states where women play a significant role in agricultural production.
This finding matters because it shows that dowry violence is not simply a failure of law enforcement. It is a symptom of a social order that assigns different economic values to women depending on their labour, their mobility, and their distance from their birth families. When a woman moves to her husband’s village, loses contact with her support network, and has no independent economic identity, the conditions for dowry-related abuse are structurally in place. What the statute book says becomes almost irrelevant.
The conviction gap
The gap between the number of cases reported and the number of convictions secured is not a mystery. It is the predictable outcome of institutional indifference at every stage of the justice delivery process.
At the police station level, officers routinely discourage families from filing FIRs, preferring to “mediate” or treat dowry complaints as domestic disputes. When FIRs are filed, they are often vague, lacking the specific details about harassment, timing, and witnesses that prosecutors later need. Forensic procedures are frequently compromised. Scenes are processed hastily, post-mortem examinations conducted without rigour, viscera samples not preserved.
At the trial stage, cases depend heavily on testimony from the victim’s parents, siblings, and neighbours. But as trials stretch across years, sometimes decades, witnesses retract, lose interest, or face intimidation. The absence of an effective witness protection framework compounds this problem enormously. The Supreme Court adopted the Witness Protection Scheme in 2018 through Mahender Chawla v. Union of India (2019), but implementation remains patchy at best.
In case after case, complainants who pursue justice are threatened, attacked, or silenced. When a witness is assaulted in the presence of government security personnel, as has happened in cases we are aware of, the failure of witness protection is not abstract. It is the reason prosecutions collapse.
What must change
We do not believe that more laws are the answer. India has enough laws. What it lacks is the institutional infrastructure, political will, and social transformation necessary to make those laws mean something.
First, investigation quality must improve dramatically. Every dowry death case should trigger a standardised protocol: Immediate scene preservation, mandatory independent forensic examination, preservation of digital evidence, including call records and messages, and financial documentation of dowry transactions. Bihar’s conviction rate of 11 per cent is not a reflection of weak law. It is a reflection of weak investigation.
Second, fast-track courts for dowry and domestic violence cases are no longer optional. When over 90 per cent of cases remain pending in courts, the criminal justice system is not functioning as a deterrent. It is functioning as a shield for the accused.
Third, witness protection must be treated as a constitutional obligation, not an afterthought. Every complainant in a dowry death case should have access to protection from the moment the FIR is filed. Attacks on complainants are a systemic problem that contributes directly to the collapse of prosecutions.
Fourth, and perhaps most importantly, we must confront the social reality that sustains the dowry system. Education is important, but education alone has not eliminated dowry. Even among highly educated families, the practice thrives, often dressed up in the language of “gifts” and “tradition.” Economic empowerment of women, genuine enforcement of inheritance rights, and community-level accountability are all necessary components of a long-term solution.
The strongest message the dowry crisis demands is not a legal one. It is a moral one. These cases are winnable if fought properly and persistently. The law provides the tools. What is missing is the institutional commitment to use them.
We have seen enough to know that justice in India is not given. It is extracted, painstakingly, relentlessly, and against tremendous resistance. That is what we intend to do.
Adv. Bhavya Razshree is an Advocate practising at the Delhi High Court. Aditya Ashok is an IIM Mumbai Post Graduate and Public Policy Consultant. Views are personal.
(Edited by Theres Sudeep)