Section 304B IPC to Section 80 BNS: Dowry Death Law Explained (2026)

In India, dowry death is now punished under Section 80 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), which replaced Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) from 1 July 2024. The text is word for word the same: a woman's unnatural death within seven years of marriage, preceded "soon before" by dowry-linked cruelty, carries seven years to life. The presumption moved to Section 118 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA).

At a glance

Old section	New section	Offence in one line	Punishment	Cognizable / bailable / triable by	Change type
IPC s.304B	BNS s.80	Death of a woman by burns, bodily injury or otherwise than under normal circumstances within 7 years of marriage, where soon before death she faced dowry-linked cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relative	Imprisonment not less than 7 years, which may extend to imprisonment for life (s.80(2))	Cognizable; non-bailable; Court of Session (BNSS First Schedule, entry 80(2); CrPC First Schedule, entry 304B)	Minor edit
IEA s.113B	BSA s.118	Court "shall presume" the accused caused the dowry death once dowry-linked cruelty soon before death is shown	—	—	Minor edit

What changed

Identical — the definition (sub-section (1)). Every word of the definition carries over: the three kinds of death, "within seven years of her marriage", "soon before her death", "cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband", "for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry", and the deeming clause "such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death".
Minor edit — the Explanation. IPC: "section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961)." BNS: "section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961." The Gazette prints "28 of 1961" as a marginal note beside the Explanation instead.
Identical — the punishment (sub-section (2)) and the heading ("Dowry death"). Neither version mentions fine.
Minor edit — placement. The CrPC First Schedule lists s.304B under Chapter XVI of the IPC, "Offences affecting the human body". BNS s.80 sits in Chapter V, "Of offences against woman and child", under the sub-heading "Of offences relating to marriage", next to cruelty by husband or relatives (s.85) and its definition (s.86).
Minor edit — the presumption (IEA s.113B → BSA s.118). "the court shall presume" becomes "the Court shall presume"; a comma is added after "soon before her death"; the Explanation now points to "section 80 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023" instead of "section 304B of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)".
Minor edit — the cruelty definition. The IPC defined "cruelty" in the Explanation to s.498A. The BNS moves the same two clauses, (a) and (b), into a separate s.86, which begins "For the purposes of section 85".

Statutory text (relevant extract)

Extract — Section 304B(1)–(2), IPC (inserted by Act 43 of 1986, s.10, w.e.f. 19-11-1986; repealed by BNS s.358(1)):

(1) Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, such death shall be called "dowry death", and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death. … (2) Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life.

Extract — Section 80(1)–(2), BNS: the same words as above, with the Explanation ending "…section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961."

Extract — Section 118, BSA:

When the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon before her death, such woman had been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death.

How it works — the ingredients

Read against its words, s.80 requires the prosecution to establish six things:

The death of a woman (s.80(1)). BNS s.2(35) defines "woman" as a female human being of any age.
A qualifying cause of death: "caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances" (s.80(1)).
Timing: "within seven years of her marriage" (s.80(1)). A death after the seventh year falls outside the definition.
Cruelty or harassment "soon before her death" (s.80(1)). The section does not define "cruelty". The cruelty definition in s.86 is framed "for the purposes of section 85" only. In Kamesh Panjiyar the Supreme Court read "cruelty" in s.304B consistently with the Explanation to s.498A IPC; s.86 now carries the same words.
By the husband or any relative of the husband (s.80(1)).
"For, or in connection with, any demand for dowry" (s.80(1)). "Dowry" has the meaning in s.2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (Explanation to s.80). There it means property or valuable security given or agreed to be given "at or before or any time after the marriage in connection with the marriage of the said parties". Dower or mahr is excluded for persons governed by Muslim Personal Law (Shariat).

Once these facts are established, two things follow. First, the death "shall be called 'dowry death'" and the husband or relative "shall be deemed to have caused her death" (s.80(1)). Second, BSA s.118 directs the Court to presume that the person who subjected her to the dowry-linked cruelty "had caused the dowry death". Under BSA s.2(1)(l), "shall presume" means the Court "shall regard such fact as proved, unless and until it is disproved". The presumption can be rebutted; it is not conclusive proof.

Worked example (from a decided case). Section 80 has no illustrations. In Satbir Singh v. State of Haryana the couple married on 1 July 1994 and the wife died of 85% burn injuries on 31 July 1995 (paras 2, 25), satisfying ingredients 2 and 3. Her brother's evidence of a dowry complaint at the Teej festival a week before her death supplied the "soon before" link (para 27). The presumption then operated and was not rebutted (paras 28–31).

What this means in practice

For the investigating officer. A suicide by a woman within seven years of marriage, or her death within that period in circumstances raising a reasonable suspicion of an offence, requires the officer to forward the body for examination by the Civil Surgeon or another qualified medical person (BNSS s.194(3)(i)–(ii)). The same applies if a relative of the woman asks for it (s.194(3)(iii)). For cases under clauses (i) and (ii), BNSS s.196(1) says the nearest Magistrate empowered to hold inquests "shall" inquire into the cause of death. As s.80 carries at least seven years, BNSS s.176(3) requires a forensic expert to visit the crime scene. That duty runs from the date the State Government notifies (within five years), with videography of the process. The offence is cognizable, so an FIR follows under BNSS s.173.
For the prosecutor. The s.118 presumption does not arise on the bare fact of an unnatural death. The foundational facts, above all dowry-linked cruelty "soon before her death", must be proved first (Charan Singh, paras 21, 23; Kamesh Panjiyar).
For the accused and defence counsel. The contest is usually over (i) whether the cruelty was proximate or had become stale or been resolved (Kans Raj), (ii) whether the demand was "in connection with the marriage" as DPA s.2 requires, and (iii) for relatives, whether any overt act is proved against each of them (Kans Raj). Rebuttal evidence has to be led. Satbir Singh stressed that the court must put incriminating circumstances to the accused when examining him (then CrPC s.313; the parallel power is BNSS s.351(1)). It also said the defence must prepare its case from the start of trial (para 36(vi)–(vii)).
For the family of the deceased. A relative can ask the police to send the body for post-mortem under BNSS s.194(3)(iii).

Judgments that still matter

The operative words of BNS s.80 repeat IPC s.304B, and BSA s.118 repeats IEA s.113B apart from drafting edits. On a reading of the text, judgments construing those words therefore remain relevant to the new sections. None of the judgments below construes BNS s.80 itself.

Kans Raj v. State of Punjab, [2000] 3 S.C.R. 662 (2000 INSC 251), decided 26 April 2000. A three-judge bench held that "soon before" is a relative term with no fixed time limit. In the Court's words: "The term "soon before" is not synonymous with the term "immediately before"". A proximate and live link between the dowry-based cruelty and the death must be proved. No presumption under s.113B arises if the dispute "stood resolved" with no cruelty after it. On relatives: "For the fault of the husband, the in-laws or the other relations cannot, in all cases, be held to be involved in the demand of dowry". It restored the husband's conviction and left the acquittal of three relatives in place (the reported text has no paragraph numbers). Why it matters now: each point turns on words BNS s.80 and BSA s.118 repeat.

Kamesh Panjiyar @ Kamlesh Panjiyar v. State of Bihar, [2005] 1 S.C.R. 903 (2005 INSC 57), decided 1 February 2005. Arijit Pasayat J., for a two-judge bench, called the s.113B presumption a presumption of law. "On proof of the essentials mentioned therein, it becomes obligatory on the Court to raise presumption that the accused caused the dowry death." The judgment lists four essentials, including that the accused is being tried for the s.304B offence. It also held that a remote incident of cruelty that has "become stale enough not to disturb mental equilibrium of the woman concerned" is of no consequence. The Court read "cruelty" in s.304B in line with the s.498A Explanation and upheld the conviction. The reported text carries no paragraph numbers. Why it matters now: the four essentials map onto BSA s.118 and BNS s.80 as they stand.

Satbir Singh v. State of Haryana, [2021] 7 S.C.R. 269 (2021 INSC 301), decided 28 May 2021. A bench of N.V. Ramana CJI and Aniruddha Bose J. (opinion by the Chief Justice) held that when the legislature used "soon before" it "did not mean 'immediately before'" (para 14). The test is a "proximate and live link" (para 15). Once the ingredients are established the s.113B presumption "mandatorily operates" and "can be rebutted by the accused" (para 18). Paras 22–23 hold that s.304B does not require a death to be classed as homicidal, suicidal or accidental. Para 36 sets out a summary for trial courts on the examination of the accused and on defence evidence. The Court upheld the s.304B conviction but set aside the s.306 conviction because suicide itself was not proved (paras 34–35). Why it matters now: it is the fullest recent statement of how the two provisions, both repeated in the BNS and BSA, work together.

Charan Singh @ Charanjit Singh v. State of Uttarakhand, [2023] 3 S.C.R. 511, decided 20 April 2023. Rajesh Bindal J., for a bench with Abhay S. Oka J., acquitted a husband convicted under ss.304B, 498A and 201 IPC. No witness described cruelty or harassment soon before the death, only earlier demands for a motorcycle and land. "The aforesaid evidence led by the prosecution does not fulfil the pre-requisites to invoke presumption under Section 304B IPC or Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act" (para 21). An unnatural death in the matrimonial home within seven years was held not to be enough on its own (para 23). Why it matters now: it marks the limit of the presumption. The seven-year window and an unnatural death do not shift the burden without proof of proximate, dowry-linked cruelty.

Which law applies to your case

BNS s.358(2) provides that the repeal of the IPC does not affect any penalty or punishment incurred under it. Proceedings may be "instituted, continued or enforced" as if the IPC "had not been repealed". On a reading of that text, a dowry death that occurred before 1 July 2024 is charged under s.304B IPC, and one on or after that date under s.80 BNS. BNSS s.531(2)(a) keeps any trial, inquiry or investigation pending immediately before 1 July 2024 under the CrPC. BSA s.170(2) does the same for the Evidence Act. The punishment is identical either way, so Article 20(1) of the Constitution raises no issue of a greater penalty. For the full analysis see which law applies to an offence before 1 July 2024.

Frequently asked questions

What is the BNS equivalent of Section 304B IPC? Section 80 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 replaces Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for offences committed on or after 1 July 2024. The definition, the seven-year window, the deeming clause and the punishment in Section 80 are word for word the same as Section 304B. The only change inside the section is that the citation 28 of 1961 for the Dowry Prohibition Act is printed in the margin of the Gazette rather than in the Explanation.

What must the prosecution prove for dowry death under Section 80 BNS? Section 80(1) requires the death of a woman caused by burns or bodily injury, or occurring otherwise than under normal circumstances, within seven years of her marriage. It must also be shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or a relative of her husband, for or in connection with a demand for dowry. Dowry takes its meaning from Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

What does soon before her death mean in Section 80 BNS? The phrase is not defined in the BNS. In Satbir Singh v. State of Haryana (2021 INSC 301, paras 14-15) the Supreme Court held that it does not mean immediately before, and that a proximate and live link between the cruelty and the death must be shown. Kans Raj v. State of Punjab (2000 INSC 251) held that no presumption arises if the dispute is shown to have been resolved with no cruelty afterwards.

How does the presumption in Section 118 BSA work? Section 118 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, which replaces Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, says the Court shall presume that a person caused the dowry death once it is shown that he subjected the woman to dowry-linked cruelty or harassment soon before her death. Under BSA Section 2(1)(l), shall presume means the Court must treat the fact as proved unless and until it is disproved. The accused can rebut it with evidence.

What is the punishment for dowry death, and is it bailable? Section 80(2) BNS prescribes imprisonment for not less than seven years, which may extend to imprisonment for life; the section does not mention fine. The BNSS First Schedule lists the offence as cognizable, non-bailable and triable by the Court of Session, which is the same classification the CrPC First Schedule gave Section 304B IPC.

Can the husband's relatives be convicted of dowry death? Section 80(1) BNS covers the husband and any relative of the husband who subjected the woman to the cruelty or harassment. In Kans Raj v. State of Punjab (2000 INSC 251), the Supreme Court held that in-laws cannot in all cases be held involved for the fault of the husband and that overt acts attributed to them must be proved beyond reasonable doubt; it left the acquittal of three relatives undisturbed while restoring the husband's conviction.

Is a suicide within seven years of marriage a dowry death? It can be. In Satbir Singh v. State of Haryana (2021 INSC 301, paras 22-23), the Supreme Court held that a death otherwise than under normal circumstances can be homicidal, suicidal or accidental, so Section 304B does not require the court to classify the death first. The other ingredients, including dowry-linked cruelty soon before death, must still be proved; Section 80 BNS uses the same words.

Which law applies to a dowry death before 1 July 2024? Section 358(2) BNS saves liabilities and punishments incurred under the repealed IPC and lets proceedings continue as if the IPC had not been repealed, so a death before 1 July 2024 is charged under Section 304B IPC. Section 531(2)(a) BNSS keeps trials and investigations pending on that date under the CrPC. The punishment is the same under both sections.

Sources

Acts and sections read (BNS, BNSS and BSA from the Gazette; IPC, CrPC and Evidence Act from the official texts): BNS ss.2(35), 80, 85, 86, 358; IPC ss.304B, 498A; BSA ss.2(1)(l), 118, 170; IEA s.113B; BNSS ss.176(3), 194(3), 196(1), 255, 351(1), 531(2)(a) and First Schedule entry 80(2); CrPC ss.174(3), 176(1) and First Schedule entry 304B; Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, s.2 (library text); Constitution, Art. 20(1).

Judgments read (full text, Veritect Supreme Court corpus): Kans Raj v. State of Punjab (2000_3_662_683_EN.md); Kamesh Panjiyar v. State of Bihar (2005_1_903_912_EN.md); Satbir Singh v. State of Haryana (2021_7_269_290_EN.md); Charan Singh v. State of Uttarakhand (2023_3_511_522_EN.md).

This page explains the statutory text and the judgments cited as they stand. It is not legal advice; for a specific case, consult an advocate.

Section 304B IPC vs Section 80 BNS — Dowry Death