LAHORE, March 7: The Lahore High Court on Friday directed the Punjab chief minister and the Lahore DCO to ensure implementation of the Bridal Gift Restriction Act 1976 in letter and spirit, which prescribed Rs5,000 as the upper limit of dowry and Rs25,000 as the maximum expenditure on meals at a marriage.

Justice Tassadaq Hussain Jilani made this decision while accepting a petition for implementation of Section 3 to 9 of the 1976 act.

Petitioner Tariq Aziz Advocate argued that the act was among one of the most prominent statutes governing expenditure on marriage, but it had been put on the back burner.

He further argued that under the act, the Nikah registrar was bound to inform the DC (now the DCO) about the worth of dowry and other expenditures within 15 days of a marriage. The law prescribed six months of imprisonment and confiscation of the excess dowry for the violators.

However, these provisions had never been implemented by the authorities concerned, which made things extremely difficult for the poor, argued the petitioner. He contended that the 1976 act was a live statute in all the four provinces of the country and had not been withdrawn or repealed by any subsequent law.

Additional Advocate General Mohammad Bilal Khan argued that the Punjab government had already enforced the Marriage Ordinance to keep the wasteful expenditure on marriages under check. The provincial government cannot be blamed for negligence as it has already taken adequate steps in this regard, the AAG argued.

He objected to the 1976 act, saying that it was a provincial statute subservient to federal laws.

Mr Aziz, however, refuted AAG’s submissions on grounds that the 1976 act was not a provincial law. It had been passed by the National Assembly and was equally binding on all the provinces of the country.

To a query from court, he submitted that the upper ceiling of Rs5,000 for dowry could be revised by the sitting Parliament.

The implementation of this law was a responsibility of the State and the court could issue directions to the authorities concerned in this regard under Article 199 of the 1973 Constitution, pleaded the petitioner.

The petitioner claimed that according to press reports, legal advisor to the chief minister was still making raids on marriage parties to stop the violation of one-dish restriction. “It confirms that the Marriage Act has not been effective in controlling marriage expenses, and a forceful implementation of the BGRA 1976 is required,” he pleaded.

However, he withdrew the names of the prime minister and owners of three hotels from the list of respondents in the petition, agreeing to the court observation that the name of prime minister should be deleted for implementation of BGRA 1976 to the extent of Punjab.