Authored By: AKSHAL.M
SATHYABAMA INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
ABSTRACT
Honour killing constitute one of the gravest forms of honour-based violence and is committed in the name of honour which is misguidedly viewed as the preservation of familial or community honour. These crimes, often arising out of inter-caste and inter-faith relationships, self-choice marriages or perceived violations of traditional social norms, represents serious infringements of the constitutional rights to life, equality, dignity and personal liberty. Even though the Indian judiciary has recognised an individual’s right to freely choose a life partner, honour-based violence continues to be widespread in India owing to long-standing patriarchal mindsets, caste- based discrimination and the absence of a comprehensive statutory framework. The article critically analyses the constitutional and criminal law framework governing the honour killings in India. It analyses the adequacy of existing legal provisions in addressing the unique nature of honour-based crimes. It further undertakes a comparative study of the legislative responses of Pakistan, Jordan and the United Kingdom to find out best practices and possible reforms for the Indian legal system. The paper argues that honour killings need to be recognised as organised crimes against constitutional morality, human rights, and individual autonomy, not just as acts of homicide. The paper concludes with a recommendation to introduce a comprehensive Honour Crimes Act with preventive measures, victim and witness protection, institutional accountability and stringent penal provisions to effectively tackle honour-based violence in India.
KEYWORDS: Honour Killing; Constitutional Morality; Human Rights; Comparative Law; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Criminal Justice Reform; Individual Autonomy; Gender Justice; Right to Life; Rule of Law.
INTRODUCTION
In Shakti Vahini vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India Unequivocally declared that no individual, family, or community has the authority to interfere with the marriage choices of consenting adults. Yet, despite repeated judicial interventions, honour killings continue to claim lives across India, exposing the persistent gap between constitutional guarantees and social realities. Honour killings are one of the most serious violations of constitutional rights and human dignity and reflect the ongoing tussle between constitutional morality and deep- rooted social norms in India[1]. The Constitution guarantees to every individual the rights of equality, liberty, dignity, privacy and freedom of personal choices[2]. But these guarantees are often violated by violence committed in the name of protecting the honour of the family or the community. Honour killings are usually sparked by inter-caste and inter-faith marriages, self-choice marriages or relationships that run counter to traditional patriarchal and caste-based structures[3]. Such crimes are not cultural practices or expressions of social morality, but international offenses against fundamental rights and the rule of law.
Honour-based violence affects women disproportionately because of the patriarchal attitudes that associate family honour with female autonomy and sexuality. But men who go into inter-caste or inter-faith relationships are victims too. This means that these are not individual offences but ways of collective social control. India does not have a dedicated statutory framework addressing the distinctive nature of honour-based crimes, but the Bharatiya Nyaya Snahita, 2023 criminalises honour killings under general provisions relating to murder, conspiracy, abetment and unlawful assembly. This article argues that the current legal framework in India is inadequate as honour killings are prosecuted as homicides without recognising their collective, discriminatory and organised nature. It is submitted that a comprehensive Honour Crimes Act is needed to provide preventive protection, institutional accountability, victim rehabilitation and effective prosecution.
HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF HONOUR KILLING
Origin and Meaning of Honour Killing
Honour killing has its roots in societies which were patriarchal in nature, in which honour of the family was connected to the behaviour of individuals, especially of females. The breaking of any social or martial code would be met with violent punishment. Modern law condemns these practices because honour killing is essentially homicide and an infringement of constitutional rights.
Honour killings as a Global Phenomenon
Honour killings are a global human rights issue with a presence in a variety of regions and cultures. The United Nations recognises these crimes as a form of gender-based violence, and many jurisdictions have strengthened criminal laws, victim protection measures and international cooperation to effectively prevent, investigate and prosecute honour-based offences[4].
Evolution of Honour-Based violence In India
In India, honour killing is a traditional phenomenon, which exits due to the caste system as well as patriarchy and is backed up by unofficial institutions like Khap Panchayats[5]. Constitutional provisions of freedom and equality, together with judicial interventions, do not prevent from honour killing and therefore require legislative changes.
HONOUR KILLING AS A CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE
Constitutional Morality versus Social Morality
Honour killings are the perfect example of this clash between constitutional morality and social morality. Constitutional morality is premised on equality, freedom, dignity and individuality, whereas social morality is characterised by its emphasis on patriarchy and castes[6]. The apex court in India has time and again made it clear that constitutional morality trumps any other custom or tradition.
Honour Killing as a violation of Fundamental Rights
Honour killings seriously violate the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. These crimes penalise people for exercising their freedom to choose a life partner or personal relationships and therefore undermine equality, liberty, dignity, privacy and personal autonomy. Consequently, honour killings are subversive of the very fundamental of constitutional democracy, rule of law and individual self-determination.
International Human Rights Perspective
International human rights law clearly condemns honour killings as violative of the rights to life, equality, liberty and non-discrimination. States, including India, are bound by instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Discrimination [7]against Women to take effective legislative, administrative and judicial measures to prevent honour-based violence and to protect the vulnerable.
INDIAN LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND JUDICIAL RESPONSE
Constitutional protection against honour killings
Article 14- Equality before Law
Article 14 of the Constitution talks about the equality of all citizens before the law and the protection of laws for each individual. Honour killings contravene the spirit of this constitutional provision by practicing discrimination based on one’s case religion, or social positions
Article 15- Prohibition of Discrimination
The article 15 of the constitution bars any form of discrimination based on religion, caste, sex. Honour killings which arise out of cross- religious and caste marriages are unconstitutional acts of discrimination and mainly affect women though patriarchal oppression and gender discrimination.
Article 19- Freedom of choice and expression
According to Article 19 of the constitution, it is our fundamental right to have fundamental rights. Honour killings contravene these constitutional rights because of coercion and restriction of an individual’s freedom of choice.
Article 21- Right to Life, Liberty, Privacy and Dignity
Article 21 of the constitution gives us the most comprehensive constitutional protection against honour killings by safeguarding our life and personal liberties including our personal dignity and right to privacy. Supreme court has ruled that right to choose one’s life partner is part of personal liberty.[8]
STATUTORY FRAMEWORK GOVERNING HONOUR KILLINGS
Honour killings under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, provides for punishment of honour killings by way of provisions relating to murder, conspiracy, abetment and unlawful assembly. But it does not recognise honour killing as a separate offence and therefore misses out on the organised and discriminatory nature of honour killing based on caste and community biases[9].
Criminal Conspiracy and Abetment
Honour killings are usually deliberate crimes in which the family or community members plans together. Hence, the provisions on criminal conspiracy [10]and abetment are important to attribute liability to those who incite, facilitate or participate in honour-based violence.
Common Intention and Unlawful Assembly
Often family or community members take part in honour killings together. The doctrines of common intention and unlawful assembly [11]are thus intended to render all those who participate in an offence committed in pursuance of a common criminal design equally liable for honour-based offences.
Preventive Power of Police Authorities
Preventing policing is the key to tackling honour-based violence. Law enforcement agencies are required to protect threatened persons in a timely manner and judicial orders[12] stress that the prevention of honour crimes through pre-emptive action is an important as the punishment of offenders after commission.
JUDICIAL RESPONSE
Lata Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [13]
The Supreme Court held that every adult has a fundamental right to choose his or her life partner irrespective of caste or religion. It condemned honour killing in no uncertain terms, and directed law enforcement agencies to ensure effective protection to inter-caste and inter-faith couples facing threats.
Arumugam Servai VS. State of Tamil Nadu [14]
It condemned the Khap Panchayats and the like, who interfered with marriages between consenting adults, as unconstitutional. They were described as barbarous, and it was held that these institutions do not have any legal standing to dictate marriage.
Shakti Vahini VS. Union of India[15]
These guidelines covered all the necessary measures to fight against honour killings, and included safe places, special units, and instant safety for those at risk. The Supreme Court laid down, without any ambiguity, that selecting one’s life partner is a part of personal freedom guaranteed by Article 21.
Shafin Jahan VS. Ashokan K.M.[16]
The principle of freedom of choice was re-affirmed by the Supreme Court in the Hadiya case. The Supreme Court held that it was not possible for either parents or the court to interfere with the free choices of adults. This principle ensures that there is constitutional protection of personal liberty, privacy and autonomy.
Laxmibai Chandaragi B VS. State of Karnataka[17]
The Supreme Court has re-affirmed that every adult person has a constitutional right to make his/her own choice regarding their life partner. There was criticism of inaction by the police against the interference of families.
Judicial Recognition of the Right to Choose a Life Partner
Supreme Court has consistently supported constitutional morality and personal liberty against discriminatory social customs. Still, there are unabated honour killings due to poor implementation of the judiciary’s guidelines, lack of police protection and no specific legislation on the issue, highlighting the need for necessary statutory reforms and better institutional accountability.
COMPARATIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS
Comparative Study of Honour Killings Laws
Honour killings are a human rights issues around the world, and jurisdictions have responded with a variety of legal responses. This comparative analysis of India, Jordan, and the United Kingdom provides an overview of different legislative approaches, discusses best practices and approaches the need for a comprehensive and victim-centric legal framework to effectively address honour-based violence.[18]
India
Present Legal Position
Although India prosecutes honour killings under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, there is no dedicated legislation recognising honour crimes, and the existing statutory provisions for prevention, victim protection, and institutional accountability [19]are inadequate.
Judicial Developments
The Supreme Court has consistently upheld the right to choose a life partner, condemned honour killings and directed preventive measures, police protection and institutional safeguards to protect consenting adults from honour-based violence.
Existing Challenges
While there are judicial safeguards, honour killings continue, owing to poor legislation, poor enforcement, poor witness protection, and persistent caste-based discrimination, underlining the requirement for a dedicated statutory, and more institutional accountability[20].
Pakistan
Pakistan has a long history of honour killings, known locally as “Karo Kari”. Prosecutions have historically been hampered by legal provisions that allow the family of the victim to pardon the perpetrators, leading to widespread impunity. The Criminal Law (Amendment) (Offence in the Name or Pretext of Honour) Act, 2016[21], which was passed after Qandeel Baloch was murdered, brought important changes by making imprisonment mandatory even where the perpetrators are forgiven by their families. This amendment recognised honour killings as aggravated offences against society as opposed to private family disputes and greatly enhanced criminal accountability. Honour- based violence continues to be prevalent in Pakistan and the country’s legislative reforms highlight the importance of closing procedural loopholes and reducing impunity and ensuring that perpetrator of honour crimes are given effective and meaningful punishment.
Jordan
Jordan has been criticised in the past for penal provision that allowed reduced sentences for honour-based offences. Under continued domestic and international pressure, the country repealed this provision, thus strengthening criminal accountability and ensuring its legal framework is consistent with international human rights standards. The explicit permission to mitigation punishment on the ground of honour is no longer found today in contemporary Jordanian law [22]and courts are adopting a stricter approach to honour crimes. However, prosecution is still subject to societal attitudes and judicial discretion and this shows that legislative reform is not enough. Jordan’s experience illustrates that combating honour-based violence effectively requires not only strong legal reforms but also sustained social change, consistent enforcement, and measures addressing patriarchal norms and gender-based discrimination.
United Kingdom
Honour killing is not acknowledged as an independent crime in the United Kingdom, and those who perpetrate honour killings are charged according to various legislations dealing with murder, forced marriage, domestic violence, and coercive control among other crimes. Legislation such as Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act, 2007[23], Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act, 2014 [24]offer a complete shield to the victims. Alongside legislation, the Crown Prosecution Service has developed special guidelines of prosecution aimed at ensuring investigations are carried out from the victims’ perspective while involving interagency cooperation. The multidisciplinary approach adopted by the United Kingdom shows that crime prevention requires a combination of legislation, special policing, cooperation between institutions, and community involvement.
Comparative Analysis
Upon comparing the experience of other nations, it becomes clear that despite having a good constitutional system which protects individual liberty, India lacks proper legislative measures to tackle honour killings. Criminal liability in Pakistan[25] has been improved due to the absence of pardoning clauses, Jordan has done away with any form of mitigation for honour-related crimes, and the United Kingdom takes a holistic victim-oriented approach by means of specialised police forces and coordination between institutions. It thus emerges from the experiences of these nations that mere punishment in criminal law is not enough to counter honour-related crimes. Therefore, India must legislate on a comprehensive Honour Crimes Act.
CRITICAL ANALYSIS AND REFORM-ORENTIED DISCUSSSION
Critical Evaluation of the Indian Legal Framework
Though there are strong constitutional protections and progressive judicial measures, honour killings still persist in India. The 2023 edition of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita does not consider the organised and sociocultural nature of these crimes and punishes them according to the penal code. Hence, there is no provision for preventive measure and victim, witness, and institutional protection in the current law. It highlights the need for an anti-honour killing legislation that will ne able to stop such crimes before they take place.
Absence of Standalone Legislation
India’s legal framework does not have a specific law recognising honour crimes and thus, there are no dedicated mechanisms for prevention, victim protection, rehabilitation and monitoring of persons under threat of honour-based violence.[26]
Procedural and Evidentiary Challenges
The evidentiary problems of studying honour killings- where the killers are usually relatives and witnesses are unwilling to testify because of fear of reprisal, social pressure or retaliation-hamper successful prosecution.
Social Acceptance and Community Pressure
The persistence of honour killings is sustained by entrenched patriarchal and castest mindsets that stigmatise inter-caste and inter-faith relationships and create an environment of social acceptance of honour-based violence and weekend effective legal enforcement.
Role of Khap Panchayats and Informal Community Bodies
However, Khap Panchayats do not have any constitutional or statutory powers and yet they continue to influence the social behaviour by calling for intervention in consensual relationships, subverting constitutional governance, individual liberty and the rule of law.
LESSONS FROM COMPARATIVE JURISDICTION
What India Can Learn from Pakistan
Procedural changes made to the laws of Pakistan in 2016 removed any loopholes that were allowing honour crimes to go unpunished. The same could be done in India, which should look at honour-motives as an aggravating factor calling for increased criminal liability and procedural protection.
Lessons from Jordan’s Penal Reforms
Law reforms in Jordan made it clear that honour and family pride could never serve as justification for any form of violence. Elimination of special provisions that provide mitigation of punishment for honour crimes showed the dominance of human rights, equality and legality.
Best Practices from the United Kingdom
The multi-disciplinary approach taken by the United Kingdom in dealing with this problem included police response, victim protection, anonymous reporting and coordination of institutions.
RECOMMEDATIONS
Enactment of a Standalone Honour Crimes act
Parliament should enact a comprehensive Honour Crimes Act that would make honour-based offences separate crimes, establish enhanced penalties, and create statutory mechanisms for prevention, protection of victims, witness security, and effective institutional accountability.
Preventive Protection of Couples
The authorities should develop specific protective measures, including safe houses, emergency helplines and rapid response police units, to protect couples facing credible threats from family members or community organisations.
Witness Protection and Victim Rehabilitation
Comprehensive witness protection and victim rehabilitation programmes are essential to effective prosecution to promote cooperation, reduce fear and social isolation and protect vulnerable individuals in the criminal justice process.
Police Accountability and Mandatory SOPs
The investigation of Honour-based Threats must be governed by uniform standard operating procedures, and disciplinary and legal action must be taken against police officers who fail to provide timely protection despite credible evidence of imminent danger.
Fast-Track Courts for Honour Crimes
Specialised fast-track courts should be set up to facilitate expeditious investigation, prosecution and adjudication of honour-based offences thereby strengthening judicial efficiency, deterrence and access to timely justice.
Regulation of Illegal Community Councils
Community organisation should be legally prevented from interfering in consensual marriages and harsh penalties should be imposed on persons or groups who incite, facilitate or commit honour-based violence.
Public Awareness and Educational Reforms
To prevent violence against women in the long term, there must be a concerted effort by educational institutions, civil society and government agencies to promote constitutional values, gender equality and respect for individual autonomy and personal choice.
CONCLUSION
The phenomenon of honour killings is considered to be one of the biggest challenges to considered to be one of the biggest challenges to constitutional democracy, human dignity, and the rule of law in India. Although such crimes are defended as a necessity for maintaining family honour, cultural or traditional norms, honour killings are blatant violations of equality, freedom, and dignity as the key constitutional rights. As shown by the article, honour killings are much more than just a crime against an individual; rather, these actions directly contest constitutional morality and democratic government. By a set of landmark cases, the Supreme Court of India has stated that every competent person has stated that every competent person has the basic constitutional right to choose his/her life partner free from any restrictions from family, caste, organisation, or any other extraneous body. However, the continued practice of honour-related crimes demonstrates that judiciary alone cannot do anything about the deep-seated patriarchy and casteism in Indian society.
Comparative analysis of the experience of Pakistan, Jordan, and the United Kingdom shows that a successful legal intervention entails much more than mere criminal penalties. Strong laws, specialised police force, accountability mechanisms, rehabilitations of victims, witnesses’ protection, and consistent public education together make up the building blocks of a successful strategy to counter honour-based violence. While the constitutional jurisprudence of India is commendable in so far as its progressive approach in ensuring the fundamental right of individual liberty, the fact remains that the lack of special statutory regime hampers preventive and implementation of the law. Hence, there is urgent need to pass the Honour Crimes Act that will contain measures such as prevention, penal, victim’s protection, and holding accountable both the individuals and community organisations responsible for committing honour crimes. It is therefore necessary to implement the constitution as well as to adhere to constitutional morality which calls for a collective effort from the State, judiciary, law enforcing organs, civil society, and citizens in order to eschew discriminatory social customs in the society.
REFERENCE(S):
LEGISLATION
- India Constitution, 1950
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005
- Special Marriage Act, 1954
- Criminal Law (Amendment) (Offences in the Name or Pretext of Honour) Act, 2016
- Jordanian Penal Code
- Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act, 2007
- Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act, 2014
SECONDARY SOURCES
- P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, 9th ed., LexisNexis, 2023.
- N. Shukla, Constitution of India, 14th ed., Eastern Book Company, 2023.
- K. Takwani, Criminal Procedure, 9th ed., Eastern Book Company, 2023.
- D. Gaur, Textbook on Indian Penal Code (Now Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Perspective), Universal Law Publishing, 2024.
- Flavia Agnes, “Inter-Caste Marriages and Honour Crimes in India,” Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 46, No. 43 (2011).
- Sylvia Vatuk, “Honour Killings in India: Caste, Patriarchy and Law,” South Asia Research, Vol. 38, No. 2 (2018).
- Law Commission of India, 242nd Report (2012) – Prevention of Interference with the Freedom of Matrimonial Alliances (in the Name of Honour and Tradition).
- Law Commission of India, 267th Report (2017) – Hate Speech.
- Crown Prosecution Service (United Kingdom), Honour-Based Abuse and Forced Marriage Legal Guidance.
- Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Law and Justice—Explanatory Notes on the Criminal Law (Amendment) (Offences in the Name or Pretext of Honour) Act, 2016.
- Government of Jordan—Official Penal Code Reform Documents
[1] United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Preventing and Responding to Killings of Women and Girls on the Basis of Gender (2020).
[2] Constitution of India, arts. 14, 15, 19, and 21.
[3] M. P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, 9th ed., LexisNexis, 2023
[4] United Nations, Handbook for Legislation on Violence against Women (2012); United Nations General Assembly, Working towards the Elimination of Crimes against Women and Girls Committed in the Name of Honour, U.N. Doc. A/RES/59/165 (2004).
[5] V. N. Shukla, Constitution of India, 14th ed., Eastern Book Company, 2023.
[6] K. D. Gaur, Textbook on Indian Penal Code (Now Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Perspective), Universal Law Publishing, 2024.
[7] Universal Declaration of Human Rights, arts. 1, 3 & 7; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, arts. 6, 17 & 26; Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, arts. 2 & 5.
[8] K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 S.C.C. 1.
[9] P. Ishwara Bhat, Fundamental Rights: A Study of Their Interrelationship, Eastern Book Company, 2019.
[10] Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, No. 45 of 2023, § 61 (India).
[11] Arumugam Servai v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2011) 6 S.C.C. 405.
[12] Shakti Vahini v. Union of India, (2018) 7 S.C.C. 192.
[13] Lata Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2006) 5 S.C.C. 475.
[14] Arumugam Servai v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2011) 6 S.C.C. 405.
[15] Shakti Vahini v. Union of India, (2018) 7 S.C.C. 192.
[16] Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M., (2018) 16 S.C.C. 368.
[17] Laxmibai Chandaragi B. v. State of Karnataka, (2021) 3 S.C.C. 360.
[18] Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, Dec. 18, 1979, 1249 U.N.T.S. 13.
[19] C. K. Takwani, Criminal Procedure, 9th ed., Eastern Book Company, 2023.
[20] Flavia Agnes, Inter-Caste Marriages and Honour Crimes in India, 46 Econ. & Pol. Wkly. 33 (2011).
[21] Criminal Law (Amendment) (Offences in the Name or Pretext of Honour) Act, 2016 (Pak.).
[22] Human Rights Watch, Jordan: Repeal Laws that Excuse Honour Crimes (2017).
[23] Crown Prosecution Service, Honour-Based Abuse and Forced Marriage: Legal Guidance.
[24] Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, c. 12 (U.K).
[25] Criminal Law (Amendment) (Offences in the Name or Pretext of Honour) Act, 2016 (Pak.).
[26] Law Comm’n of India, Report No. 242, Prevention of Interference with the Freedom of Matrimonial Alliances (in the Name of Honour and Tradition) (2012).
