The Supreme Court of India strongly reaffirmed the need to combat the social evil of dowry and called for sensitising future generations about equality in marriage while deciding State of U.P. vs. Ajmal Beg etc. The case concerned the dowry death of Nasrin, who was harassed for demands including cash, a motorcycle, and a television, and was ultimately set on fire within a year of marriage. While the Trial Court convicted the husband and his mother, the High Court acquitted them citing inconsistencies and their poor financial status. The Supreme Court rejected this reasoning, holding that Section 304-B IPC raises a presumption of dowry death once harassment for dowry “soon before death” is proved. Minor inconsistencies, the Court held, do not dilute the core prosecution case. Restoring the conviction, the Court directed the husband to surrender, while granting humanitarian relief to the aged mother. Going beyond the case, the Court issued systemic directions including educational reforms on gender equality, strengthening Dowry Prohibition Officers, training police and judges, expediting dowry cases, and promoting grassroots awareness through Legal Services Authorities to eradicate dowry practices.