The short answer

  • A marriage that was forced does not count in law. Marriage requires the complete voluntary consent of both parties; Articles 1046 and 1042 of the Civil Code of the PRC (《民法典》) prohibit arranged marriages, marriages by purchase and any other interference with the freedom of marriage; a marriage registered under duress may be revoked on request within one year from the day the duress ended (Article 1052).
  • But for a forced marriage to send anyone to prison, the threshold rests on one word: violence. Article 257 of the Criminal Law of the PRC (《刑法》) punishes only interference with another person’s freedom of marriage by violence, and where it causes the victim’s death the sentence is two to seven years’ imprisonment; without beating, binding or confinement, verbal abuse, cutting off support or threatening suicide usually does not reach it.
  • Falling short of the criminal law does not mean the law does nothing. Article 2 of the Anti-Domestic Violence Law of the PRC (《反家庭暴力法》) counts habitual verbal abuse, intimidation and other mental harm as domestic violence; a victim may report to the police, seek help from the women’s federation, and apply to a court for a personal safety protection order (Article 23).
  • Whether the bride price is returned depends on registration and on whether the couple lived together. Where there is neither registration nor cohabitation, it should in principle be returned; where the marriage was registered but cohabitation was very short and the sum very high, the court may order partial return; the parents who actually received the money may be joined as co-defendants.
  • The remains are not a bargaining chip. The remains of the deceased are protected by Article 994 of the Civil Code, and the right to deal with them belongs to the close relatives (近亲属); without registration of marriage the groom is not a spouse in law, and there is no legal basis for the idea that whoever collects the body must give up the bride price.

1. Drawing the factual boundary first

The incident happened in Lushan County, Henan Province. Public reports say that a 28-year-old woman teacher fell to her death from the seventh-floor wedding room of the groom’s home on the day the wedding was held; in the note she left, she wrote that her parents had pressed her to marry for seven years, had taken an RMB 270,000 bride price for her marriage, and that the money was kept for her younger brother to marry. The day before the wedding she announced on WeChat Moments that the wedding was cancelled and the gift money would be returned, but it did not happen.

The details come from media reports and from the note; whether the local authorities have opened a case, and how it would be characterised, has not been publicly concluded. What follows deals only with the rules — between forcing a marriage and causing death by forcing a marriage lie two gates: causation and evidence.

2. A marriage that was forced does not count in law

The first cornerstone of China’s marriage system is voluntariness. Article 1046 of the Civil Code provides that marriage shall be based on the complete voluntary consent of both parties, that neither party may compel the other, and that no organisation or individual may interfere; Article 1042(1) prohibits arranged marriages, marriages by purchase and other interference with the freedom of marriage, and prohibits demanding money or property through marriage. Article 61 of the Law of the PRC on the Protection of the Rights and Interests of Women (《妇女权益保障法》) likewise provides that interference with a woman’s freedom to marry and to divorce is prohibited.

So when parents take a bride price, fix a date and send their daughter off to be married, none of that has binding legal effect: if the daughter does not consent, the marriage cannot be formed. Where a marriage has been registered but was entered into under duress, Article 1052 allows revocation on request within one year from the day the duress ended. But revocation settles only whether that marriage counts; it does not settle the harm already done — and what families most often want to know about is criminal liability.

3. The crime of violently interfering with the freedom of marriage: a short provision, a hard case to file

Article 257 of the Criminal Law runs to three sentences: whoever interferes with another person’s freedom of marriage by violence is liable to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than two years or to criminal detention; where the offence in the preceding paragraph causes the victim’s death, to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than two years and not more than seven years; an offence under the first paragraph is handled only on complaint.

Taken apart, there are three elements.

  • The means must be violence. Beating, binding, confinement, seizing the bride — means of that kind, sufficient to overpower the person. Repeated verbal abuse, taking away an identity card, withholding living expenses, threatening suicide are not violence.
  • What is interfered with must be the freedom of marriage. Whom to marry, when to marry, whether to divorce.
  • The first paragraph is a private prosecution. The police generally do not open a case on their own initiative; the victim must bring the prosecution. Where the victim dies, the second paragraph applies and that restriction no longer holds.

Reality is harsh: by the time a case reaches the death of the victim, the victim can no longer give an account, and causation has to be proved from chat records, witnesses, medical records and the note left behind; those applying the pressure are often the victim’s own parents, and other relatives are unwilling to testify. Such cases are therefore very rare, and most are not filed or are withdrawn.

Other routes: beating or unlawful detention may fall under the crime of intentional injury or the crime of unlawful detention; prolonged humiliation or abuse in serious circumstances may involve the crime of abuse (Article 260 of the Criminal Law).

4. Without laying a hand on anyone, it can still be domestic violence

Article 2 of the Anti-Domestic Violence Law defines domestic violence (家庭暴力) as physical or mental harm inflicted between family members by beating, binding, maiming, restricting personal liberty, or habitual verbal abuse, intimidation and the like. Note the last two words — mental harm.

Adult children and their parents are family members. Stalking, surveillance and verbal abuse in a long campaign of forced marriage, taking away a salary card and controlling income so that only a few hundred yuan in pocket money is left, where habitual and continuous, may be argued to constitute domestic violence.

None of the three routes requires winning a criminal case first: report to the police and ask for a warning notice; complain to the women’s federation, the residents’ committee or the villagers’ committee (Article 13); or apply to a court for a personal safety protection order under Article 23 — the court shall accept the application and make its ruling within 72 hours, or within 24 hours in urgent cases (Article 28), and may prohibit the other party from harassing, following or contacting the applicant.

These tools are of use only while the person is still alive. In consultations like this I often say: get yourself out first, then talk about evidence and accountability.

5. The RMB 270,000 bride price: with the person gone, who gets the money back

A bride price (彩礼) is not the price of a person, but property given according to custom for the purpose of marriage. The rules are in the Supreme People’s Court Provisions on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Cases of Disputes over Bride Price (Fa Shi [2024] No. 1), in force from 1 February 2024.

  • No registration of marriage. Under Article 5(1) of Interpretation (I) on the Marriage and Family Part of the Civil Code (《民法典婚姻家庭编解释（一）》), where return of a bride price given according to custom is sought, the court shall support it; where there is no registration but the parties have lived together, Article 6 of the bride-price provisions leaves the proportion to be set by the court in light of the length of cohabitation, the use made of the money and the fault of both sides.
  • The marriage has been registered. Under Article 5 of the bride-price provisions, where the marriage is registered and the parties have lived together, a claim for return on divorce is generally not supported; but where cohabitation was short and the sum very high, the court may order partial return in light of local custom.

Public reports do not say whether the couple registered. If there was no registration and no cohabitation, the RMB 270,000 should in principle be returned, and the right to claim lies with the groom’s side; if the marriage was registered, it depends on how long they lived together and where the money went.

Who is sued also matters. Article 4 of the bride-price provisions: the party to the engagement and the parents who actually gave the bride price may sue as co-plaintiffs, and the other party and the parents who actually received it may be co-defendants. Where the money was received by the parents, the groom can sue the woman’s parents directly; where money is demanded through marriage in the name of a bride price, Article 2 also supports its return.

6. Who claims the remains: there is no such thing as collecting the body in exchange for the bride price

Article 994 of the Civil Code: where the name, portrait, reputation, honour, privacy or remains of a deceased person are infringed, the spouse, children and parents are entitled to request the actor to bear civil liability in accordance with law. The remains of the deceased (遗体) are therefore protected as personality interests (人格利益), and the holders of that right are the close relatives.

Identity is the key. A wedding is not registration of marriage: Article 1049 of the Civil Code provides that the marriage relationship is established upon completion of the marriage registration. So —

  • Where there is no registration, the groom is not a spouse and has no legal standing to deal with the remains; nor is the obligation to return the bride price increased or reduced by who collects the body.
  • The parents are close relatives, and the rights and duties to deal with the remains rest with them; refusing to collect the body on the ground that the daughter had already left the house produces no legal effect.
  • Long storage of the remains generates custody costs; where the cause of death is in doubt, a police investigation may be requested and, if necessary, an autopsy — but an autopsy requires the consent of the close relatives.

Tying the collection of the body to the return of the bride price is a bargaining logic of private negotiation; once in court, the two matters are tried and decided separately.

7. Six things the family can do now

  • Preserve the originals of the note, the WeChat Moments posts, chat records and call recordings — do not keep screenshots only; where necessary, notarise the evidence.
  • Report to the police in writing and ask for a receipt of the report; if no case is opened, apply for reconsideration, and apply to the procuratorate for supervision over filing.
  • Report the forced marriage and the financial control in writing to the women’s federation, the sub-district office and the villagers’ committee, and keep the records of acceptance — they will be needed in later proceedings.
  • In a bride-price return action, join the parents who actually received the bride price as co-defendants and apply for the bank records to be obtained, to show where the money went.
  • Discuss the handling of the remains first; if no agreement is reached, the close relatives decide together; if there is a dispute, ask the police and the funeral administration to coordinate — do not use the remains as a bargaining chip.
  • If the deceased left an estate, Article 1127 of the Civil Code makes the spouse, children and parents the first-order heirs; where she was unmarried and had no children, her parents inherit.

A final note

The provisions cited here are taken from the Civil Code, the Criminal Law, the Anti-Domestic Violence Law, the Law on the Protection of the Rights and Interests of Women and the Supreme People’s Court’s judicial interpretation on bride-price disputes as currently in force; the events are taken from public reports and from the note. No judicial finding has been made public, and this article does not characterise the case.

Behind a forced marriage there is usually long-term control inside a family. The tools the law can offer are limited: revocation of the marriage, a personal safety protection order, return of the bride price, and a criminal report — four routes, each with its own threshold, the outcome turning on whether there was violence, whether there was registration, and whether the evidence is complete.

If you are facing a forced marriage, a bride-price dispute or domestic violence, you are welcome to contact Lawyer Wang: telephone 186-0113-9509, WeChat wang223040.

Quick answers

Is forcing someone into marriage a criminal offence in China?
Only where violence is used. Article 257 of the Criminal Law punishes interference with another person’s freedom of marriage by violence, with two to seven years’ imprisonment where it causes the victim’s death; verbal abuse, cutting off money or threats of suicide alone usually do not reach that threshold.
Can the bride price be recovered after the bride has died?
It depends on registration and cohabitation. Without registration or cohabitation the RMB 270,000 should in principle be returned, and the claim belongs to the groom’s side; where the marriage was registered and the couple lived together, return is generally not supported, though very short cohabitation and a very high sum may justify partial return.
Who may deal with the remains, and can they be held back over the bride price?
The close relatives, here the parents. Without registration of marriage the groom is not a spouse and has no legal standing, and refusing to collect the body produces no legal effect; in court the two matters are heard and decided separately.

This is an English edition of Wang Xin’s original Chinese article, 婚礼当天从7楼跳下去：父母逼婚，法律真的管不了吗？. It explains the law of the People’s Republic of China in general terms and is not legal advice for any particular case; outcomes depend on the specific facts and on how local authorities apply the rules.