New Delhi: The Supreme Court has issued a detailed set of nationwide directions to States, Union Territories and High Courts for the time-bound trial, monitoring and disposal of cases under Section 304-B (dowry death) and Section 498-A (cruelty) of the Indian Penal Code corresponding to Sections 80 and 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in continuation of its earlier judgment on the systemic difficulties in enforcing India's dowry laws.
A Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Augustine George Masih was hearing miscellaneous applications filed in the wake of the Court's judgment dated 15.12.2025 in State of U.P. v. Ajmal Beg, whereby the Court had allowed the State's appeals and restored a trial court's conviction of the respondents under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC. While upholding the conviction, the Court had observed that, unlike the present case where the accused were finally brought to book, “many, who openly seek and give dowry, go scot-free,” and had acknowledged that the practice of giving and taking dowry has deep roots in society, requiring a concentrated and sustained effort from the Legislature, Judiciary, law enforcement and civil society alike.
In its earlier judgment, the Court had issued directions requiring States to reform educational curricula to reinforce constitutional equality between spouses, ensure effective deployment and public awareness of Dowry Prohibition Officers, provide periodic sensitisation training to police and judicial officers, and have High Courts take stock of pending Section 304-B and 498-A cases for expeditious disposal noting pointedly that the case at hand had taken 24 years, from 2001 to conclude. States and High Courts were directed to file compliance affidavits, and the matter was listed for further consideration.
Pursuant to these directions, affidavits and data were filed by several High Courts, States and Union Territories. Having considered a consolidated analysis of this material placed on record by Mr. Kunal Chatterji, learned counsel assisting the Court, along with suggestions received from various High Courts and States, the Bench proceeded to issue a fresh and comprehensive set of directions.
States and Union Territories were directed to strengthen institutional support mechanisms, including Dowry Prohibition Officers, One Stop Centres, Family Counselling Centres, Women Help Desks, victim assistance mechanisms, helplines and online grievance redressal systems, and to undertake sustained awareness and educational programmes on dowry, gender equality and women's rights in coordination with Education Departments, Women and Child Development Departments and State Legal Services Authorities.
On the judicial side, the Court directed that cases under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC/Sections 80 and 85 BNS be treated as priority matters, with District Judiciary identifying and periodically monitoring cases pending beyond three years. Trial Courts were directed, as directory benchmarks subject to exceptional circumstances, to secure prompt appearance of the accused after filing of the charge-sheet, frame charges preferably within 60 to 90 days, and thereafter proceed with recording of evidence on a continuous or day-to-day basis under Section 309 CrPC/Section 346 BNSS, 2023. Courts were further directed to discourage unnecessary adjournments, appoint Legal Aid Counsel or Amicus Curiae where defence counsel remain repeatedly absent, and prepare a witness calendar immediately after framing of charge to ensure structured and timely examination of witnesses.
High Courts were directed to integrate stage-wise pendency tracking, digital dashboards and automated alerts for old pending matters within existing Court Information System infrastructure, to periodically review old pending appeals, revisions, and Section 482 CrPC/Section 528 BNSS petitions, particularly those involving stay of trial proceedings and to ensure periodic training and sensitisation of judicial officers, police, prosecutors, protection officers and counsellors dealing with dowry-related offences, including through designation of specially sensitised prosecutors.
In matters arising primarily out of matrimonial discord and not involving allegations of death or grievous violence, the Court permitted concerned Courts to explore mediation or counselling wherever legally permissible, without compromising the seriousness of cognizable offences or the rights of parties. Finally, all High Courts and States/Union Territories were directed to file status and compliance reports on the 15th of January, May and September each year, covering pendency and disposal statistics, stage-wise case status, awareness initiatives, appointment of Dowry Prohibition Officers, and training programmes conducted, until pendency of such cases is substantially reduced.
The Court appreciated the assistance rendered by Mr. Kunal Chatterji as well as the learned senior counsel and counsel appearing for the respective parties, and listed the matter for further compliance-cum-periodic reporting on 15.10.2026.
Appearances:
For the Petitioner (State of U.P.): Mr. Sharan Dev Singh Thakur, Sr. A.A.G.; Mr. Sudeep Kumar, AOR; Mr. Kunal Chatterji, AOR; with counsel.
For the Respondents: Mr. Shekhar Kumar, AOR; Mr. Shantanu Krishna, AOR; and learned counsel/AORs appearing for the several States, Union Territories and High Courts before the Court.
Case Title: The State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Ajmal Beg Etc., Miscellaneous Application Nos. 2689-90 of 2025 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 132-133 of 2017
