The Supreme Court of India partly allowed the appeal in Baboo Khan vs. State of Rajasthan, holding that a demand of gold ornaments at a child’s chhoochhak ceremony does not constitute a dowry demand under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant had been convicted for dowry death and cruelty after his wife and infant child were found dead in a well. The prosecution alleged that harassment arose from a demand for a gold ring and chain. Examining the law, the Court reiterated that “dowry” under Section 304B must be directly connected with marriage. Relying on Satvir Singh v. State of Punjab, the Court clarified that demands made after marriage, particularly those linked to childbirth or related ceremonies, fall outside the statutory definition of dowry. Accordingly, the conviction for dowry death under Section 304B IPC was quashed. However, on the charge under Section 498A IPC, the Court found sufficient evidence of cruelty. It held that the husband’s conduct amounted to mental harassment of the wife, independent of the dowry death charge. Since the appellant had already undergone the sentence awarded for this offence, no further punishment was imposed. The judgment draws a clear legal distinction between dowry-related demands and post-marriage social or ceremonial expectations.