Daily Times

The meaning of marriage has become contested over the past few years in the academic scholarship of Pakistan. Some argue it to be a union between heterosexual adults for the procreation of children. Others contend it is a contract between consenting adults. And more recently it has been said to be a contract between two consenting heterosexual adults based on mutual trust and love. Against these variants it is unimaginable to see marriage as a contract between the families of the consenting adults to share the burden of bridal gifts, dowry and presents; if not lighting and fireworks expense. Unfortunately, to my surprise, the Dowry and Bridal Gifts (Restriction) Act 1976 (DBGRA) seems to have done just this.

DBGRA 1976 has ten sections. Section 2 clarifies the conceptual scope of bridal gift, dowry and presents. Section 3 deals with the capping on bridal gift, dowry and presents. Section 6 specifies the total expense that parties to marriage can incur on mehndi, barat and walima together. Section 7 imposes a duty to display dowry. Section 8 mandates to register dowry articles. Section 9 indiscriminately sets out the penalties on parents for non-compliance. However, It is quite a surprise that this section does not penalise those defiant parents who insist on dowry in violation of the Act.

Under section 2 (a) the onus of bridal gift is on the bridegroom or his family, this is to furnish the bride with any property other than mehr. Whereas under section 2 (b) dowry is a burden on the bride’s parents or guardian to furnish their daughter or her husband or in-laws with any property other than inherited property. In addition, under section 2 (e) there is an additional burden on the bride and bridegroom to give presents to their relatives. And under section 3 (1) the parties to marriage are allowed to spend on bridal gift, dowry and presents an amount up to 5,000 rupees. Moreover, under section 6 they are allowed to incur an expense of 2,500 on mehndi, barat and walima. As such these sections do little uproot the menace of dowry rather they cap the expense involved in these cultural practices to a statutory limit; a statutory lacuna which explains the dreadful existence of these marriage-related burdens today. Accordingly if their total expense is within 7,500 they are eligible for registration of list of bridal gift, dowry and presents, so long as it is signed, witnessed and submitted to the registrar within fifteen days of delivery or receipt. And the Act under section 9 further details the penalties for non-compliance. By virtue of the same section it empowers the federal government to take over any property exceeding the statutory cap on the condition that it will use it for the marriage of poor girls. This section is perhaps redundant after the devolution of marriage to provinces pursuant to 18th amendment.

Despite DBGRA’s lack of implementation, after more than two decades, in 2000 a need was felt to introduce legislation to curb extravagant marriage expense. To this end, the Marriage Functions (Prohibition of Ostentatious Displays and Wasteful Expenses) Ordinance 2000 (MFO) was passed. MFO had seven sections. Under section 3(a) decorating house, building, street or road will lights was prohibited. And by virtue of sections 3(b) and (c) explosion of crackers, use of firearms and fireworks was prohibited. Whereas under its section 4, food menu on nikah, rukhsati, walima and rasme-hina was restricted to one dish and one sweet dish with hot and cold soft drinks. And its section 6 made its contravention punishable with one month imprisonment or fine between 1,000 and 5,000 rupees or with both. Further section 7 defined it as a non-cognizable offence.

Under section 2 (a) the onus of bridal gift is on the bridegroom or his family, this is to furnish the bride with any property other than mehr. Whereas under section 2 (b) dowry is a burden on the bride’s parents or guardian to furnish their daughter or her husband or in-laws with any property other than inherited property

Yet, after more than four decades of DBGRA, in 2016 the Punjab Government repealed the MFO and introduced The Punjab Marriage Function Act 2016 (PMFA) as a substitute. It has twelve sections. It preserves the restrictions on lighting expense and food menu in MFO 2000 but made some additional changes through sections 3 (d) and (e), 6 and 8. By virtue of section 3(d) and (e) display of dowry to the public eye and celebrations going beyond the threshold of reasonable nuisance or disturbance are prohibited. Moreover, places of marriage celebrations are ordained to close at or before ten. And under section 8, contravention of these sections is liable to one month imprisonment and fine between 50,000 to two million rupees.

A closer look at the legislations reveals that marriage is still statutorily a contract between families who are willing to incur a total expense of 7,500 rupees or expense of one meal for as many guests as possible as there is no statutory cap on the number of guests that could be invited to marriage ceremony. To make marriage a commitment of love and affection between adults it is important to give individuals the freedom to choose their partners. This is because when people choose persons of their own liking they are least concerned about the pomposity of marriage and are much more concerned about their unity through consistent mutual love and trust. Therefore to make the statutory interventions on marriage effective it is important to repeal defunct laws such as DBGRA and categorically outlaw dowry and bridal gits to free families from the burden of marriage liability.

The writer is a permanent teaching faculty at ‘Pakistan College of law’