Guidelines for State Governments by the Supreme Court to prevent Honour Killings

Pressure not to marry against the wishes of family has started honour killing is defined as killing for honour by a khap panchayat.  A death that is awarded to the women or men by their own family members for marrying against their wishes or having a pre-marital relationship, marrying within the same gotra or marrying outside their caste or losing virginity before marriage and so on. The main reason contributing to this heinous crime is the mentality of people. Honour crimes violate Articles 14, 15, 19,21 and 39 of the Indian constitution.

In 2018, the Supreme Court in the case of Shakti Vahini v. Union of India laid down certain guidelines to deal with matters concerning Honour Killing. Honour killing is the homicide of a family member by other family members for believing that the victim violated the principles of a community and that the victim has brought shame to the family. The decisions concerning such killings are usually taken by a group of men sometimes known as Khap Panchayat. It has been a prevalent practice in India, especially in the North.

The judgment delivered by a three judges bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra, A.M Khanwilkar and D.Y Chandrachud, was in response to a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the constitution by an organisation, Shakti Vahini. The organisation was seeking directions for the State and Central government so as to take preventive measures to eradicate the practice of honour killing and to submit a National and State Plan of action to curb such crimes. They further requested the Court to direct the State governments to constitute special cells in each district that are easily approached by the couples for their safety and well-being. They also sought protection for the couples to marry outside their communities. Lastly, the Petitioners prayed for an issue of a writ of mandamus to the State governments to launch prosecutions in each case of honour killing and do the needful. The court while drafting the guidelines relied on 242^nd Law Commission Report as well as the survey report submitted by the petitioners.

Preventive Guidelines for Honor Killing

The guidelines are as follows:

I – Preventive Steps:

1. 1. 1. Identification: Apart from the sensitisation programmes, the Court directed the state governments to Identify areas where instances of honour killing or assembly of Khap Panchayats have been reported in the recent past, further, issuance of directives/advisories to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned Districts for extra cautiousness.
      2. Khap Panchayat gathering guidelines: The Court also laid down the procedure for dealing with information concerning any proposed gathering of a Khap Panchayat. If the police fail to prevent the conduction of the meeting then the Deputy Superintendent of Police has to be present during such gathering and video record the entire meeting.
      3. Application of Section 144 IPC: Moreover, if the Deputy Superintendent of Police is convinced that the meeting the gathering cannot be prevented and/or is likely to cause harm to the couple or members of their family, he shall submit a proposal to the Competent Authority of the concerned area for issuing orders to take preventive steps under the CrPC such as prohibitory orders under Section 144.

II –Remedial Measures

1. 1. 1. Action against Khap Panchayat: If it comes to the notice of the local police that the Khap Panchayat has taken place and it has passed any diktat to take action against a couple/family, the jurisdictional police official shall immediately lodge an F.I.R. under the appropriate provisions of the Indian Penal Code including Sections 141, 143, 503 read with 506 of IPC.
      2. Security to family: Additionally, immediate steps should be taken to provide security to the couple/family and if necessary, to remove them to a safe house.
      3. Logistical support to family: The District Magistrate/Superintendent of Police must deal with the complaint regarding the threat administered to such a couple/family with the utmost sensitivity. Further, if necessary, the couple may be provided logistical support for solemnising their marriage and/or for being duly registered under police protection, if they so desire.
      4. Accommodation to couple: After the marriage, if the couple so desires, they can be provided accommodation on payment of nominal charges in the safe house initially for a period of one month to be extended on monthly basis till one year.
      5. Additional Superintendent of Police Authorised: Only a District Magistrate/ Superintendent of Police to an officer of the rank of Additional Superintendent of Police shall be entrusted with the preliminary inquiry in such cases upon receiving a complaint.
      6. Action Mandatory: Lastly, any person who participated in such gathering that took such decision shall be booked without any exception.

III – Punitive measures

1. 1. 1. Any failure by officials to comply with the aforesaid directions shall be considered an act of deliberate negligence and/or misconduct for which departmental action must be taken under the service rules.
      2. The Court further relied on its decision in Arumugam Servai v. State of Tamil Nadu and directed the States to take disciplinary action against the concerned officials if it is found that (i) such official(s) did not prevent the incident, despite having prior knowledge of it, or (ii) where the incident had already occurred, such official(s) did not promptly apprehend and institute criminal proceedings against the culprits.
      3. Further, every state shall create Special Cells in every District comprising the Superintendent of Police, the District Social Welfare Officer and the District Adi-Dravidar Welfare Officer to receive petitions/complaints of harassment of and threat to couples of inter-caste marriage. These cells are to provide 24-hour helpline to receive and register such complaints and provide necessary assistance.
      4. Lastly, the criminal cases pertaining to honour killing or violence to the couple(s) shall be tried before the designated Court/Fast Track Court earmarked for that purpose.