The Allahabad High Court recently dismissed dowry allegations against Pranjal Shukla, questioning the basis of such claims in what it referred to as a “morally civilized society.” Justice Anish Kumar Gupta ruled that the allegations were likely spurred by personal disputes, specifically pointing to issues of sexual incompatibility between the couple.
During the proceedings, it was revealed that the conflicts primarily revolved around disagreements concerning the couple’s sexual relationship. The court concluded that these were not indicative of dowry demands but rather stemmed from personal differences between the spouses.
Justice Gupta critically remarked, “If a man were to demand sexual favors from his own wife and vice versa, where would they go to satisfy their physical sexual urges in a morally civilized society?” This statement highlighted the court’s focus on the intimate aspects of marital relations in its deliberations.
The FIR lodged against Shukla by his wife, Meesha Shukla, included accusations of dowry demand, abusive behavior, and forcing her to engage in what was described as unnatural sex. Meesha also claimed that her husband would frequently consume alcohol, watch pornography, and ignore her objections to his behavior.
Senior advocate Vinay Saran, representing Pranjal Shukla, argued that the allegations were related to the couple’s physical relationship rather than any dowry-related cruelty. He contended that the disputes arose from Meesha’s refusal to fulfill her husband’s sexual desires, not from any demand for dowry.
Upon reviewing the evidence, which included the FIR and witness statements, the court found that the claims of dowry harassment were unsupported by credible evidence. Justice Gupta’s ruling emphasized that the case seemed to be a product of general and vague allegations, possibly fabricated out of marital discontent.
