Supreme Court Issues Strong Directives to Curb Honour Killings in India

The case of Shakti Vahini vs. Union of India is a landmark judgment addressing the issue of honour killings in India. The Supreme Court had to decide on preventive, remedial, and punitive measures to curb honour crimes committed by extra-constitutional bodies such as Khap Panchayats. The Court reaffirmed that the right to choose a life partner is an integral part of individual liberty and must be protected from societal or familial interference.

Background of the Case

The petitioner, Shakti Vahini, a social organization, filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, seeking directions for:

Preventive measures to curb honour killings.
The submission of a National Plan of Action and State Plans of Action to address such crimes.
The establishment of special cells in each district to provide safety for couples at risk.
A mandatory prosecution policy for all cases of honour crimes.

The petitioner conducted a research study on honour killings in Haryana and Western Uttar Pradesh and highlighted the increasing trend of such crimes. It argued that the right to life and liberty under Article 21 was being violated in the name of honour.

Arguments by the Petitioner

The petitioner contended:

Honour killings violate Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
Khap Panchayats or similar bodies act as extra-constitutional authorities and impose unlawful punishments on couples.
The State Governments have failed to curb these crimes effectively.
A strong legal framework is necessary to prevent honour killings.

Arguments by the Respondents

The respondents, including the Union of India and various State Governments, argued:

Honour killings are already covered under the existing laws, particularly Sections 299-304 (murder) and Sections 503-506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code.
Law and order are State subjects under the Constitution, and State Governments have the primary responsibility to deal with such crimes.
The Centre had issued advisories to the States, urging them to prevent honour killings.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court delivered a strongly worded judgment, holding that:

“Assertion of choice is an inseparable facet of liberty and dignity. Class honour, howsoever perceived, cannot smother the choice of an individual.”

The Court stressed that the right to marry a person of one’s choice is protected under Article 21 and must not be curtailed by societal norms. It criticized Khap Panchayats for operating as unlawful authorities and emphasized that no person or collective entity has the right to interfere in the personal choices of adults.

Final Judgment and Directives

The Supreme Court issued comprehensive guidelines under three categories: preventive, remedial, and punitive measures.

Preventive Measures:

State Governments must identify districts where honour crimes are prevalent.
The Home Department must instruct police officials to monitor cases of inter-caste and inter-religious marriages.
Police officers must prevent unlawful gatherings of Khap Panchayats and take action against them.
District Magistrates should issue prohibitory orders under Section 144 of CrPC if there is a risk of honour crimes.

Remedial Measures:

If an honour crime has taken place, police must immediately register an FIR under appropriate IPC sections.
Victims should be provided with security and, if necessary, placed in safe houses.
Special Cells must be created in every district to handle complaints from couples facing threats.

Punitive Measures:

Police and administrative officials failing to prevent honour crimes will face departmental action.
Fast-track courts should be established to ensure that trials are completed within six months.
All persons participating in Khap Panchayats that encourage honour crimes must be prosecuted under criminal law.

Key Takeaways from the Judgment

Legal Protection for Couples: The ruling affirms that inter-caste and inter-religious marriages are legally valid and must be protected.
Condemnation of Khap Panchayats: Any attempt by self-proclaimed councils to enforce extra-constitutional punishments is illegal.
Government Accountability: State Governments must proactively curb honour crimes through police action and awareness campaigns.

The ruling is a historic step toward eradicating honour crimes in India and protecting the fundamental rights of individuals to choose their life partners.

Petitioner Name: Shakti Vahini
Respondent Name: Union of India
Judgment By: Justice Dipak Misra, Justice A M Khanwilkar, Justice D Y Chandrachud
Place Of Incident: Haryana, Punjab, Western Uttar Pradesh
Judgment Date: 27-03-2018

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Shakti Vahini vs Union of India Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 27-03-2018.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Murder Cases
See all petitions in Fundamental Rights
See all petitions in Public Interest Litigation
See all petitions in Judgment by Dipak Misra
See all petitions in Judgment by A M Khanwilkar
See all petitions in Judgment by Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Remanded
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments March 2018
See all petitions in 2018 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category