SHAKTI VAHINI V. UNION OF INDIA;(2018) 7 SCC 192

 

case summary and important points

BENCH : Former CJI Dipak Misra,

Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud

PETITIONER :

associate degree organisation named “Shakti Vahini”

vs

RESPONDENT :

Union of Bharat, Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of ladies & kid Development.

INTRODUCTION :

In this case, the petitioner that is a corporation named “Shakti Vahini” was approved to conduct a hunt Study on Honour Killings in Haryana, Punjab, and Western U.P. in which they have bump into the very fact that these instances area unit rising by leaps and bounds within the society. The petition has been filed underneath Article thirty two (32) of the Constitution of Bharat, seeking directions of the court to the govt (both State and Central), Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry of ladies & kid Development. The UOI expressed that so as to tackle this issue a bill named “The Prohibition of Interference with the liberty of marital status Alliances Bill” has been counseled by the Law Commission. Further, many state governments have filed affidavits and have given their responses towards the instrument petition.

Shakti Vahini v. Union of Bharat may be a case during which the court directed the state governments and the department of local government to form a strong mechanism which will facilitate the society to eliminate the crime of Honour Killing. Further, the court has arranged down sure preventive, punitive, and remedial measures for the states and therefore the police administration so as to create a powerful system. This case may be a obtrusive example that reflects the conclusion of dynamic and broad-minded over the stagnant and irrational ideas prevailing in society.

BACKGROUND :

Honour Killing may be a serious issue that has been flourishing quickly in many components of the nation. Panchayats in several areas take into account it as their duty to penalize those WHO perform marriages outside their caste or community and while not the consent of their elders and that they decision it“Honour Killing”. This council has the word of “Khap Panchayat”. The thought of honour has several sides. Sometimes, a young man will become the victim of honour killing or receive violent treatment at the hands of the relations of the woman once he has fallen in love or has entered into wedding. numerous actions area unit connected with the Honour Killing such as (i) loss of condition outside marriage; (ii) pre-marital pregnancy; (iii) infidelity; (iv) having unapproved relationships; (v) refusing associate degree organized marriage; (vi) posing for divorce; (vii) demanding custody of kids once divorce; (viii) departure the family or married home while not permission; (ix) inflicting scandal or gossip within the community, and (x) falling victim to rape.

All these instances produce to either crime or produce some type of instability/imbalance in society.

 

JUDGEMENT :

Dipak Misra in his judgment quoted some lines of French thinker and thinker, Weil which are: “We don’t board a world during which there exists one definition of honour any longer, and it’s a fool that hangs on to the standard standards and hopes that the planet can come back around him.” Former CJI Dipak Misra has additionally quoted the vital extracts of the 242nd Report of Law Commission that concludes the state of affairs of “Honour Killing” or “Honour Crimes”. The draft bill recommended by the commission refers to ‘Khap Panchayat” and this term includes anyone or cluster WHO gathers, assembles or congregates with associate degree intention to condemn any wedding. Further, numerous vital cases are highlighted which has Lata Singh v. State of U.P. and Another[1], during which instrument of certiorari/ judicial writ was allowed to offer protection to the petitioner and her husband WHO were underneath constant danger of “Honour Killing”. Few lines from the judgment within the case Asha Ranjan v. State of Bihar[2] “the alternative of a girl in selecting her partner in life may be a legitimate constitutional right. it’s based on the individual alternative that’s recognised within the Constitution underneath Article nineteen, and such a right isn’t expected to succumb to the thought of “class honour” or “group thinking”. Further, within the State of U.P. v. Krishna Master[3], the suspect condemned of “Honour Killing” got rigorous imprisonment always and a fine of Rs. 25,000/– was obligatory on them. The court during this case ascertained that, “The alternative of a personal is associate degree inextricable a part of dignity, for dignity can’t be thought of wherever there’s erosion of alternative. True it is, a similar is bound by the principle of constitutional limitation however within the absence of such limitation, none, we mean, nobody shall be permissible to interfere within the fructification of the same alternative. If the proper to express one’s own alternative is stalemated, it’d be extraordinarily tough to consider dignity in its sanctified completeness”. the foremost argument on behalf of the counsel of “Khap Panchayat” that this body is enjoying a vital role of spreading awareness concerning the prohibition of ‘sapinda’ and ‘sagotra’ marriages was rejected by the court by stating that just in case of recognition of marital} status, the parties will approach court and law shall observe of it.

Moreover, the Court has provided preventive, remedial and relatiative measures to construct a powerful mechanism that might spot and penalize the supporters of “Honour Killing” and directed the states to carry out these directions inside six weeks.

CASE COMMENT :

Even when the unfold of studies and also the laws making certain equal standing to each men and girls, females square measure still thought of inferior to male. The society still consideres wives, daughters, and sisters subordinate, even servile or self- sacrificing. selecting the life partner is not any crime and within the caste name, community, gotra, alternative|and several other other parameters, it’s fully unjust to penalize somebody. during this case, the Court has justifiedly condemned the entire state of affairs of “Honour Killings” that violates the correct of elementary enshrined beneath Article twenty one of the Indian Constitution and has seminal importance within the laws of our nation. it’s fully pathetic and intolerable to follow any such method of giving social control beneath the veil of one’s name and pride.
Secondly, neither council nor the relations have any authority to grant social control to the couples WHO square measure treated as sinners and suffer irreparably at the hands of those teams.
Society ought to perceive that autonomy is individualistic. the sole thanks to give social control to anyone is by following judicial mechanisms and within the eyes of law, it’s no offence to perform wedding even once the 2 persons belong to distinct caste, community or faith. The directions square measure given by the court to eradicate the apply of “Honour Killing” is an important step which might eliminate or decrease the grotesque phenomena of such incidents.

BY SAMEER

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *