Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh
Case: Shankar v. State of Rajasthan
Year: 2026
Subject: Criminal Law | Domestic Violence | Dowry | Dying Declaration | Murder
Background:
The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a man found guilty of burning his wife to death following domestic discord. While affirming the conviction, the Court made significant observations about the persistence of crimes against women in Indian society despite decades of legal reforms.
Facts of the Case:
The appellant was accused of beating his wife, pouring kerosene on her and setting her ablaze following a domestic dispute. The victim sustained severe burn injuries and subsequently died in hospital. The prosecution relied primarily on her dying declaration recorded by a Judicial Magistrate before her death.
Dying Declaration:
The Court found the dying declaration reliable and credible on the following grounds:
- A doctor had certified the victim’s fitness to give the statement.
- Medical evidence fully corroborated her account.
- The fact that eyewitnesses turned hostile did not undermine the conviction where the dying declaration was consistent and credible.
Key Legal Point:
The Court held that hostile witness testimony does not weaken a conviction where the dying declaration is credible and supported by medical evidence.
Conviction: Upheld.
Supreme Court’s Observations on Women’s Rights:
In a significant postscript to the judgment, the Court made sweeping observations about the state of women’s rights in India.
- Paradox of Progress and Violence:
The Court described the coexistence of legal progress and continuing violence against women as a paradox. Despite dowry being outlawed for decades and multiple legal safeguards existing, the social legitimacy sustaining such practices has not yet been dismantled. - Alarming Statistics:
The Court referred to NCRB data showing:
- More than 4.48 lakh crimes against women were recorded in 2023.
- Dowry related violence continues to claim over 6,000 lives annually.
- Domestic harassment remains the most reported grievance before the National Commission for Women.
- Patriarchy in Rural and Semi-Urban Areas:
The Court observed that while urban areas have witnessed significant economic and social growth, patriarchy remains deeply entrenched in rural and semi-urban settings. Authority within households continues to be overwhelmingly male and women’s autonomy remains conditional and constrained.
The Court noted that even working women in such settings are expected to complete household duties before leaving for work and after returning — reflecting the deeply unequal burden placed on women.
- Limits of Law:
The Court observed that welfare schemes and legislative reforms can incentivize change but cannot alone transform long-held societal beliefs about women’s roles within marriage and family.
“Legal and economic advancements are visible on a macro level, but patriarchy still permeates the everyday. Dowry is outlawed and has been for decades but the social legitimacy that sustains it is yet to be dismantled,” the judgment stated.
- Constitutional Promise vs Ground Reality:
The incident in this case occurred in 2011, 64 years after Independence. The Court noted that despite constitutional guarantees of equality, non-discrimination and right to life, these rights remain elusive for many women.
The Court concluded with a pointed question:
“After decades of laws, schemes, reforms and judicial recognition of equality, why does control over women’s bodies, choices and lives still persist so deeply within society? Perhaps the answer lies only with We, the People of India.”
