Khap Panchayat: Individual Liberty over Collective Oppression

Must Read

Bombay High Court Passes Order To Clarify and Modify Previous Order When State of Maharashtra Moved Praecipe

Division Bench of Bombay High Court consisting of Justice S. V. Gangapurwala and Justice Shrikant D. Kulkarni had passed...

The European Court of Human Rights Orders Germany To Pay Non-Pecuniary Damages for Prison Strip-Searches 

A serving German prisoner was repeatedly stripped searched for non-legitimate purposes. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) found...

Lack of Independent Witness Doesn’t Vitiate Conviction: Supreme Court

A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Rajesh Dhiman v State of Himachal Pradesh clarified the law in...

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi,...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent...

Supreme Court Stays Order Restraining Physical Campaigns in the Madhya Pradesh Bye-Elections

On the 26th of October, a Bench was set up which comprised Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, and...

Follow us

In a constitutional democracy like India, the citizens are governed by the law of the land. The constitutional protection guarantees citizens basic human rights and freedom. The Courts have the duty to uphold the guaranteed rights and check upon any violation. The fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution of India guarantees basic rights to the citizens such as liberty, equality, dignity, etc. These rights are protected and remedial measures are provided by the guardian of the Constitution i.e. the Apex Court whenever there is an infringement by the State or any extra-constitutional bodies.

Recently, the hon’ble Supreme Court of India delivered a landmark judgment to protect individual liberty and dignity. The Court in its judgment dealt with many severe issues that had been in direct contradiction with the sanctity of the constitution. In the case of Shakti Vahini v Union of India, the Court upheld the individual right to marry without external interference. The practice of inter-caste and inter-faith marriages have been violently suppressed since time immemorial. The individuals are subjected to collective violence often resulting in brutal deaths by the like-minded and self-proclaimed conscience keepers. These practices justify brutal acts of violence in the name of ‘honour’, and present the example of orthodox patriarchy.

The Khap Panchayat or Kangaroo Courts, extra-constitutional bodies, actively functioning in states of Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, etc are the groups of individuals acting as caste agents denouncing individual dignity and rights. They are not only responsible for devaluing basic human rights, but also carrying violent measures to uphold their caste supremacy by resorting to unlawful activities. Young individuals have been the victim of their rage for choosing to live a life with dignity and freedom. These organizations are against gender equality and have been a major impediment to the progress and upliftment of the women.

The sad state affairs came before the bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice DY Chandrachud. The petition filed by public-spirited NGO Shakti Vahini sought corrective measures to stop extra-constitutional bodies to act as conscience keepers. The issue of grave sensitivity had been given due consideration. The Court in its judgment ordered the right of individuals to decide their partner for marriage without any external interference. The Court directed corrective and protective measures to safeguard individuals from falling prey to caste-based violence. The strict enforcement of criminal laws was ordered to stop the menace of honor killing.

The Court has been clear that right of the individual to marry cannot be infringed by anyone. The question of freedom to marry with liberty and dignity has been wide clear but does the said judgment opened another door to deliberate upon the need to legislate a law to curb the menace of honor killings. The Bill proposed by the 242nd report of the Law Commission of India titled “Prohibition of Interference with the Freedom of Matrimonial Alliances” raises a moot question that whether a special law to protect individuals from freely forming matrimonial alliances can be useful to curb the menace of honor killings in India?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Bombay High Court Passes Order To Clarify and Modify Previous Order When State of Maharashtra Moved Praecipe

Division Bench of Bombay High Court consisting of Justice S. V. Gangapurwala and Justice Shrikant D. Kulkarni had passed an Order on 25th October...

The European Court of Human Rights Orders Germany To Pay Non-Pecuniary Damages for Prison Strip-Searches 

A serving German prisoner was repeatedly stripped searched for non-legitimate purposes. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) found that Germany had violated the...

Lack of Independent Witness Doesn’t Vitiate Conviction: Supreme Court

A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Rajesh Dhiman v State of Himachal Pradesh clarified the law in case of lack of independent...

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi, called for records of the...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent on immigrants to comply with. Background The...

Supreme Court Stays Order Restraining Physical Campaigns in the Madhya Pradesh Bye-Elections

On the 26th of October, a Bench was set up which comprised Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, and Justice Sanjiv Khanna. They heard...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention order of the husband of...

Supreme Court Asks Petitioner to Approach Bombay High Court in PIL for CBI Probe in Disha Salian Case

On the 26th of October 2020, the Apex Court heard the PIL praying for a CBI probe into the death of Disha Salian. The...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions, as well as shareholder disputes...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by P. Sankar & V. Sobana....

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -