Dowry Prohibition Act 1980: Provisions & Legal Impact

 

The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1980

Section-4

The demand of dowry was made on 9.11.90 and the complainant having been divorced on 20.12.90. the proceeding need be quashed as contended by the petitioners counsel.

Held: Dowry having been demanded during the continuance of the marriage the proceeding cannot be quashed as submitted by the learned Advocate on the plea of divorce subsequent to the demand of dowry.

Masud Hossain Vs. The State & Anr. 4 BLT (AD) -204

Section-4

In view of the evidence, it is palpably clear that the appellant No. 1 demanded ten thousand taka as dowry from the complainant. There being no specific evidence that other accused appellants demanded dowry, they are entitled to be acquitted from the charge.

Akramul Islam & Ors Vs. Deputy Comm. K. gonj & Ors. 3 BLT (AD)-88

Section-4

“Dowry” property brought by woman to her husband at marriage or vice versa.

If a fresh demand for dowry is made after solemnization of marriage about which there was not prior agreement and which demand does not fall strictly within the definition of dowry in section 2, then the word “Dowry” in Section 4 is repugnant in the subject or context to the definition itself. “Dowry” in Section 4 has therefore to be understood in its ordinary meaning namely, property brought by woman to her husband at marriage or vice versa. It must be held therefore that in the Bangladesh Act the legislature has taken care to see that not only the taking or giving of dowry or abatement thereof before or at the time of marriage is made an offence but also the demand thereof after the marriage.

Abul Basher Howlader Vs. The State& Ors 2 BLT (AD) -120

Section-4

Benefit of doubt—it is in evidence that father of PW1 is alive. She has been living with the father who is likely to be aware of the occurrence. But father of PW 1 did not come to depose as witness to support the allegation. It is abnormal and also unnatural. Evidence of PW 1 is the sole and only evidence on the point. There has not been any corroboration q demand of dowry from any independent witness -convict petitioner who entitled to get benefit of doubt.

Nibash Chandra Sarker Vs. Depali Rani & Anr 8 BLT (HCD)-29. 

Disclaimer:

The information contains in this web-site is prepared for educational purpose. This site may be used by the students, faculties, independent learners and the learned advocates of all over the world. Researchers all over the world have the access to upload their writes up in this site. In consideration of the people’s participation in the Web Page, the individual, group, organization, business, spectator, or other, does hereby release and forever discharge the Lawyers & Jurists, and its officers, board, and employees, jointly and severally from any and all actions, causes of actions, claims and demands for, upon or by reason of any damage, loss or injury, which hereafter may be sustained by participating their work in the Web Page. This release extends and applies to, and also covers and includes, all unknown, unforeseen, unanticipated and unsuspected injuries, damages, loss and liability and the consequences thereof, as well as those now disclosed and known to exist.  The provisions of any state’s law providing substance that releases shall not extend to claims, demands, injuries, or damages which are known or unsuspected to exist at this time, to the person executing such release, are hereby expressly waived. However the Lawyers & Jurists makes no warranty expressed or implied or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product process or service by trade name, trade mark, manufacturer or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation or favouring by the Lawyers & Jurists. The views and opinions of the authors expressed in the Web site do not necessarily state or reflect those of the Lawyers & Jurists. Above all, if there is any complaint drop by any independent user to the admin for any contents of this site, the Lawyers & Jurists would remove this immediately from its site.