The recent death of Bengaluru-based techie Atul Subhash, allegedly tied to dowry harassment, has once again laid bare the deep-seated malaise of dowry culture that continues to plague our society. While his death may have initially sparked outrage, the public discourse has quickly shifted, desensitized to the plight of women who endure such silent suffering daily. This case is not just a tragedy; it is a mirror reflecting our collective apathy toward the toxic web of patriarchal expectations and abuse that dowry perpetuates.
The issue of dowry-related violence is not new. Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code, introduced in 1986, specifically addresses dowry deaths, stipulating stringent punishments for those responsible. Yet, the grim reality persists: official data reveals that over 6,000 dowry deaths are reported annually in India. Bengaluru, with its urban and educated demographic, is not immune to this epidemic. The tragic irony of these cases lies in the societal strata they touch—the so-called educated, modern elite, often employed in professions like technology, where progressiveness is presumed, but patriarchal norms endure unabated.
Dowry deaths, however, represent only the most visible and extreme manifestation of the issue. Beneath these numbers lies an ocean of untold stories: women coerced into silence, trapped in abusive marriages, and suffering psychological and physical harm. Often, the financial demands begin subtly, masquerading as ‘gifts,’ and escalate into outright harassment. Many women are forced to compromise their self-worth and safety for fear of societal backlash, the stigma of divorce, or lack of financial independence.
The Bengaluru case is particularly troubling because it underscores the failure of both the legal system and societal mechanisms to act as deterrents. While laws exist on paper, their enforcement is often riddled with gaps. Victims who come forward face arduous legal battles, often compounded by insensitive policing, prolonged trials, and societal ostracism. The burden of proof disproportionately falls on women, leaving them with little recourse but to endure or succumb to the pressures.
Furthermore, the digital age has added a new dimension to this issue. Social media outrage, while significant, often has a fleeting impact. Hashtags trend for a day or two, and the public moves on, leaving the systemic issues unaddressed. This transient engagement contributes to the desensitization of society toward the grim reality of dowry deaths.
The way forward requires both systemic reform and a shift in societal attitudes. First, the legal framework must be strengthened. Fast-track courts specifically dedicated to dowry-related cases could ensure swift justice, reducing the psychological burden on survivors and their families. Second, sensitization programs for law enforcement and judiciary personnel are crucial to handle such cases with the sensitivity they demand. Third, financial empowerment of women, through accessible education and employment opportunities, must be prioritized to reduce dependence on abusive spouses and in-laws.
However, laws and policies alone cannot solve the problem. Society must confront the normalization of dowry culture head-on. The practice of lavish weddings, exorbitant dowries, and the silent expectation of financial exchanges perpetuates the very mindset that leads to such tragedies. Education campaigns, starting from schools, should challenge these norms and instill values of gender equality. Media, too, has a significant role to play in reshaping narratives and sparking sustained, meaningful discourse.
Ultimately, the fight against dowry-related violence must be collective. It requires the courage of individuals to speak up, the diligence of institutions to enforce the law, and the conscience of society to reject regressive practices. The Bengaluru case is not just a wake-up call—it is a reminder of the cost of our indifference. For every Atul Subhash or the countless unnamed women who have suffered in silence, justice is not merely a legal mandate; it is a societal obligation.
Let this tragedy not fade into yet another statistic. Instead, let it serve as a rallying cry to dismantle the toxic structures that continue to claim lives and dreams. Only then can we hope to heal the wounds inflicted by this centuries-old scourge.
* Advocate author, Legal Analyst, Alumni of SOAS , London, is an IAFL Fellow.
Comments