“HONOUR KILLINGS’: CRIMINAL LAWS AND

JUDICIAL TREATMENT

RESEARCH PAPER IN:

CRIMINAL LAW II

SWAPNIL DAS
ID: 2717
II YEAR, B.A. LL.B. (HONS.), IV TRIMESTER

1
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES:

CASES:

(1) Arumugam Servai v. State of Tamil Nadu

(2) Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT) of Delhi
(3) Chinnasamy v. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Udumalpet Sub Division
(4) Gurdev Singh v. State of Haryana
(5) Krishna Master v. State of Uttar Pradesh
(6) Lata Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh
(7) Pardeep Kumar v. State of Haryana
(8) Shakti Vahini v. Union of India
(9) Smt. Laxmi Kachawaha v. State of Rajasthan
(10)Sujit Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh

STATUTES:

2
INTRODUCTION-

“Honour killing’ is a term that is used to refer to the murder of a person (very often a woman) by
members of their family or community, that is perpetrated because the deceased was deemed to
have brought dishonour to the family or community by their actions. 1 Such ‘dishonourable’
actions entail going against the collective will of the family or community by exercising one’s
individual freedom, and include not accepting an arranged marriage, marrying outside one’s
caste or within one’s gotra, leaving one’s husband, being sexually active outside marriage etc.
Indian society is particularly patriarchal and marred by caste divisions and as such, honour
killings are a matter of serious concern, especially in the rural belts of states such as Haryana,
Punjab Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh etc., where extra-judicial bodies such as ‘khap panchayats’
enforce societal and familial norms by directing violence upon those who fail to adhere to them.

In this paper, I attempt to analyse honour killing as a crime in India. In doing so, firstly, I shall
trace the judicial developments dealing with the matter of honour killings. Secondly, I shall trace
some of the developments and discourse surrounding the reform of legislation in the country
regarding honour killings and I shall conclude by compiling some recommendations that would
enable faster and more reliable justice for victims of honour-based crimes.

JUDICIAL DEVELOPMENTS-
1
Vipin Kumar Singhal, 'Honour Killing in India: An Assessment' [2014] SSRN Electronic Journal.

3
In India, the courts have taken a strong stance on the matter of honour killings. One of the
foremost judgements where the courts took cognizance of the gravity of honour killings was that
of Sujit Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh 2. In this case, a couple who had married outside their
respective castes were facing harassment from their parents, to the extent that they were fearing
for their lives.3 The Allahabad High Court was very stern in its denouncement of the practice of
honour killings as a ‘blot on our society’ 4, and the police was directed to ensure the couple don’t
face any harassment, and to undertake strong measures to ensure that other couples who go
against societal norms to marry don’t undergo such harassment, and those who commit honour
killings are brought to justice. 5 The court took cognizance of the fact that honour killings are in
fact indistinct from pre-meditated murder, and should be treated as such.6 The judgement of Lata
Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh7 delivered by a division bench of the Supreme Court is
another landmark ruling in this regard. When the petitioner in this case married a man outside
her own caste (after attaining majority) against the will of her family, she was subjected to severe
harassment by her own brothers. Her husband’s family also had to undergo extreme harassment,
facing physical violence at the hands of the petitioner’s brothers. Some of her in-laws were even
arrested as a result of a false complaint filed by her brothers, alleging that she had been
kidnapped by her husband.8 Furthermore, there were even death threats issued by the brothers to
the petitioner, her husband and her in-laws.9 Like in the previous case, the court took cognizance
of the barbaric nature of honour killings10 and also provided for criminal proceedings against the
brothers.11 However, the matter of particular concern here is the fact that the legal apparatus was
misused to intimidate the petitioner and her husband. The judiciary has given further recognition
to this matter in the case of Pardeep Kumar v. State of Haryana 12. The High Court of Punjab
2
2002 SCC OnLine All 1326.
3
Ibid [3]’
4
Ibid [7].
5
Ibid [7].
6
Ibid [1].
7
(2006) 5 SCC 475.
8
Ibid [5].
9
Ibid [6].
10
Ibid [18]
11
Ibid [20].
12
2008 (3) RCR (Crim) 376

4
and Haryana dealt with the matter of couples who elope to marry against the will of their parents
in this judgement, in particular the matter of complaints being filed by parents of the girl against
the boy, as was seen in the Lata Singh case. The court recognized that giving protection to every
single couple who elopes could result in the misuse of such protection, and as such, sought to
struck a balance between the individual liberties of the runaway couples and the requirements of
society and procedures so as to prevent the misuse of the process of the courts. 13 Some of the
protections accorded to the runaway couples include deferral of arrest of the boy in case of filing
of abduction case by the girl’s parents until the girl’s statement has been taken, direction to the
police to not forcibly hand over the girl to her parents against her consent if she is a major and
granting power to the police to undertake requisite action if any substantive offence is deemed to
have been committed against the couple14. Hence, we see that the courts have been proactive in
the matter of protection of the individual liberties of those who go against societal norms and
face harassment for the same, and in protecting them from honour killings.

In the aforementioned cases, we see the courts taking a proactive stand to protect couples from
honour killings and harassment. We must also proceed to look at what happens when honour
killings actually take place. First, we can take a look at the case of Krishna Master v. State of
Uttar Pradesh.15 In this judgement, the Supreme Court reversed the order of acquittal granted by
the Allahabad High Court to three people (who were sentenced to death by the Trial Court) who
killed six people as an act of honour killing, and granted them life sentences. 16 The Court also
upheld the fact that upholding honour was a very flimsy ground on which almost an entire family
was wiped out and as such, it could fall under the ambit of rarest of rare cases and as such, the
trial court was valid in imposing capital punishment. 17 Death sentence wasn’t imposed by the
Supreme Court only because the act was 20 years ago. We can also take a look at the case of
Gurdev Singh v. State of Haryana.18 It is popularly known as the Manoj-Babli case, and
involves a young couple who were murdered for marrying within the same clan as per the orders
of the local khap panchayat. The District Court had awarded death sentences to five perpetrators
13
Ibid [6].
14
Ibid [25].
15
(2010) 12 SCC 324.
16
Ibid [80].
17
Ibid [77].
18
2011 RCR CRI 2 950.

5
and a life sentence to the head of the khap panchayat. The High Court ended up commuting the
sentence of four of the perpetrators to life sentences and ended up acquitting two, including the
Khap panchayat head.19 It was held that it cannot be considered to be a rarest of rare case just
because it is an honour killing.20 However, we see that the Supreme Court has held in the case of
Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT) of Delhi 21, where a man killed his daughter for maintaining an
incestuous relationship with her uncle, that honour killings would be considered as a rarest of the
rare case and as such was deserving of a death sentence. 22 Hence, we see that the judiciary has
come down strongly on the perpetrators of honour crimes and has recognized the need for severe
punishment to be meted out to these perpetrators so as to deter others from partaking in such
barbaric acts.

Another important aspect is the recognition of the role of khap panchayats and other such extra-
judicial bodies. We see the Rajasthan High Court expressing concerns over the matter of caste
panchayats as early as 1999 in the judgement of Smt. Laxmi Kachawaha v. State of
Rajasthan.23 Apart from the many cases dealing with the role of khap panchayats in Punjab,
Haryana and Uttar Pradesh etc., we also see the role of katta panchayats (khap panchayats are
called so in Tamil Nadu) being strongly denounced in the case of Arumugam Servai v. State of
Tamil Nadu.24 Hence, we see that the problem of khap panchayats is far-reaching, both in terms
of time range and geographical range and as such, the courts have directed the authorities to
tackle this problem.

Yet another important facet is the cases where the idea of honour killing hasn’t been mentioned
explicitly in the judgement. A very important case in this regard is that of Chinnasamy v.
Deputy Superintendent of Police, Udumalpet Sub Division. 25 In this case, a young couple who
had married beyond caste boundaries were slashed with knives by at the order of the girl’s father,
leading to the death of the young man. The Madras High Court in its judgement overturned the

19
Ibid [31].
20
Ibid [29].
21
2011 CIJ 395 CTJ (1).
22
Ibid.
23
AIR 1999 Raj 254.
24
(2011) 6 SCC 405
25
2020 SCC OnLine Mad 1207.

6
death sentence awarded to the girl’s father by the trial court, who was found guilty of criminal
conspiracy, murder and offence under section Section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 and acquitted him. Five of
ther other ten accused who had appealed also had their sentences commuted from life to rigorous
imprisonment for life for a minimum period of 25 years. The prosecution was not only unable to
prove a chain of circumstances that would establish the meeting of the minds of the accused to
prove criminal conspiracy, they did not even invoke the angle of caste-based honour killing in
the case and presented it as regular homicide. As such, the courts did not take that in
consideration and delivered the judgement accordingly. Hence, we can see that when courts do
not consider the honour killing angle in cases of honour killings, the punishment is less severe
since the gravity of the situation lessens in the eyes of the courts.

A final landmark case that we must take into account is that of Shakti Vahini v. Union of
India.26 As part of this judgement, the Supreme Court delivered a range of preventive, punitive
and remedial measures against honour killings that would have to be followed by the States to
counter honour killings. Hence, we see yet again the pro-active nature of the courts in its action
against the crime of honour killings.

26
(2018) 3 SCC (Cri).