Man’s Suicide Ignites Controversy Surrounding India’s Dowry Law

An Indian man, aged 34, died by suicide on the evening of 9 December. A sign found near his body stated, “justice is due”. Atul Subhash left behind a comprehensive 24-page suicide note and an 81-minute video. In these, he attributed his actions to difficulties in his marriage and ongoing divorce proceedings. Both the letter and video, which include disturbing personal information, have gained widespread attention on social media platforms, sparking public indignation. The software engineer, based in the southern city of Bengaluru, leveled allegations of continuous harassment and torture against his estranged wife, Nikita Singhania, along with her mother and brother. These accusations were denied by the accused. Subsequently, the three individuals were arrested and a court ordered their remand for a period of 14 days. Subhash’s death has also energized men’s rights activists, initiating a broader discussion concerning India’s stringent dowry law. This legislation was originally intended to safeguard women from harassment and potential murder. Previously, Singhania had accused Subhash and his family of harassing her over dowry. A common argument suggests that, given the consistent increase in divorce cases, the law is now being exploited by women to harass their husbands, potentially driving them to suicide. India’s Supreme Court has also commented on the matter, with one judge characterizing it as “legal terrorism” that was “intended to be used as a shield and not as an assassin’s weapon”. Conversely, women’s rights activists highlight that substantial dowry demands from the families of husbands continue to result in the deaths of thousands of women annually. Subhash and Singhania were married in 2019 but had been estranged for three years. Subhash stated he was prevented from seeing their four-year-old son. He further alleged that his wife had initiated “false court cases” against him, citing cruelty, dowry harassment, and other offenses. Within the video, he accused the Singhania family of “extortion”, claiming they had requested 30 million rupees ($352,675; £279,661) to drop the legal proceedings, 3 million rupees for access to their son, and an increase in monthly maintenance payments from 40,000 rupees to 200,000 rupees. He also detailed numerous lengthy journeys undertaken over recent years for court appearances, and accused a judge of harassment, soliciting a bribe, and ridicule. A notice, seemingly issued by the judge, dismisses these allegations as “baseless, immoral and defamatory”. The news of his suicide ignited widespread protests across multiple cities. Numerous individuals utilized social media platforms to call for justice for Subhash. Protesters asserted that his suicide ought to be classified as murder and directed their anger towards Singhania, demanding her arrest and life imprisonment. On X (previously Twitter), thousands of users tagged the American multinational company employing her, calling for her termination. In response to the public outcry, Bengaluru police initiated an investigation into the individuals mentioned in the suicide note. On 14 December, Singhania, her mother, and her brother were apprehended on charges of “abetment to suicide”. During questioning, Singhania refuted the accusation of harassing Subhash for financial gain, as reported by the Times of India, citing police statements. Previously, Singhania herself had made serious allegations against her husband. In her 2022 divorce petition, she accused him, his parents, and his brother of dowry harassment, stating they were dissatisfied with the wedding gifts from her parents and demanded an extra 1 million rupees. Despite dowries being prohibited in India since 1961, the bride’s family is still commonly expected to provide cash, clothing, and jewelry to the groom’s family. A recent study indicates that 90% of Indian marriages include such exchanges, with payments between 1950 and 1999 totaling a quarter of a trillion dollars. Furthermore, data from the National Crime Records Bureau reveals that 35,493 brides were killed in India between 2017 and 2022 due to dowry demands, averaging 20 women daily. These incidents sometimes occurred years after the marriage. In 2022 alone, over 6,450 brides were murdered over dowry, which translates to an average of 18 women each day. Singhania asserted that her father suffered a fatal heart attack shortly after her wedding, following a visit from Subhash’s parents who demanded money from him. She also alleged that her husband would threaten her and “beat me up after drinking alcohol and treated the husband-wife relationship like a beast” by demanding unnatural sex. Subhash had denied all these accusations. Police authorities have stated that they are continuing to investigate both the allegations and counter-allegations. However, Subhash’s suicide has intensified demands to revise – or even abolish – India’s strict anti-dowry legislation, specifically Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. This law was enacted in 1983 following a surge in dowry-related deaths in Delhi and other parts of the nation. At the time, there were frequent reports of brides being burned to death by their husbands and in-laws, with these killings often disguised as “kitchen accidents”. Strong protests from female Members of Parliament and activists compelled the parliament to introduce the legislation. According to lawyer Sukriti Chauhan, “the law had come after a long and hard fight” and “allows women to seek justice in cases of cruelty in their matrimonial homes”. Nevertheless, over time, the law has frequently been a subject of news, with men’s rights activists asserting that women are misusing it to harass their husbands and their relatives. India’s Supreme Court has also issued warnings regarding the law’s misuse on numerous occasions. On the same day Subhash’s suicide was reported, the Supreme Court, in a separate case, again highlighted “the growing tendency to misuse the provision as a tool for unleashing personal vendetta against the husband and his family”. Amit Deshpande, who founded the Mumbai-based men’s rights organization Vaastav Foundation, states that the law is predominantly being utilized “mostly to extort men” and that “there are thousands of others who are suffering like Subhash”. He reports that their helpline receives approximately 86,000 calls annually, with the majority of cases pertaining to matrimonial disputes, including fabricated dowry accusations and extortion attempts. Deshpande further elaborated, “A cottage industry has been built around the law. In each case, 18-20 people are named as accused and they all have to hire lawyers and go to court to seek bail. There have been cases where a two-month-old baby or an ill nonagenarian was named in dowry harassment complaints.” He added, “I know these are extreme examples but the whole system enables this in some manner. Police, judiciary and politicians are turning a blind eye to our concerns.” Mr. Deshpande cited government crime data spanning over 50 years, indicating that a significant proportion of male suicides involved married men, with family discord being the contributing factor in one out of every four such suicides. He also contended that patriarchy disadvantages men, stating, “Women have recourse to laws and they get sympathy, but people laugh at men who are harassed or beaten by their wives. If Subhash was a woman he could have had recourse to certain laws. So, let’s make laws gender neutral and extend the same justice to men so lives can be saved.” He further suggested that strict penalties should be imposed on those who abuse the law, as a lack of such measures would fail to act as a deterrent. Ms. Chauhan concurred that women who exploit the law should face punishment, but maintained that any legal provision is susceptible to misuse. She noted that the Bengaluru case is currently undergoing judicial review, and if it is established as a false accusation, then punishment should be applied. However, she stated, “But I do not support it becoming gender neutral. The demand for that is regressive as it disregards the need for special measures that acknowledge that women are disproportionately impacted by violence.” She asserted that those targeting Section 498A are “driven by patriarchy and because it’s a law for women, attempts are made to strike it down”. She further emphasized, “It came after years of societal patriarchal injustice. And this patriarchy remains the reality of our generation and will continue for generations to come.” She concluded that despite the existence of the law, dowry demands are widespread, leading to the ongoing deaths of thousands of brides. She advocated that the immediate priority is to “make the law stronger”. “If three out of 10 cases that are filed are false, then it is for the courts to impose penalty on them,” she stated, adding, “But women are still suffering very much in this country so do not ask to repeal the law.”