Oleena Chaudhuri
Policy Analyst and Researcher
Amidst the Indian legacy of secularism and democracy, there exists corners where wide range of patriarchal crimes on sovereignty are committed—all in the name of honour. “Honour (ijjat)” of a family is used to measure ‘purity’ of women. Individuals that are brought up with this mindset are supposed to have no autonomy of choices or autonomy on their lives, they are governed purely by an honour code. The family’s honour remains untouched as long as their progeny does not decide to malign it by marrying someone on their own. Honour killing is the perception that an inter-caste couple brings shame to the family, by infringing societal norms. Such acts automatically put human rights under strict duress. Conceptual agencies of “choice”, “individualism” and “autonomy” challenge societies that set stringent norms for seeking love.
The term “honour” crimes is heavily misleading. It not only suggests such killings are honourable, but also, indicates that these crimes are a by-product of the so-called customs, traditions and faiths of the communities. Human Rights Watch defines honour killings as “acts of violence, usually murder, committed by male family members against female family members by being romantically involved with or choosing to marry men outside their caste, class or religion.” However, in case of India, the victim maybe male or female, victim of a simple trigger deep rooted in the society. Honour killings are committed to eradicate dishonour, shame and embarrassment— concepts that are created by people themselves, enough to provoke family members to turn against their own.
India’s book of horror:
The concept of arranged marriages, that is widely prevalent in India renders an individual to be ‘socially handicapped’ in the name of protecting one’s family by not seeking a partner for oneself. India witnessed a 796% rise in honour killings in 2014-2015! Shameful for an otherwise progressive country, rates of honour crimes are increasing day by day, especially in the Northern parts of India. States of Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh exhibit majority of the cases. However, in some parts of India, such as in the state of West Bengal, honour killings ceased about a century ago, mainly due to activism by social reformers like Raja Rammohan Roy – who banned Sati. Vivekananda, Vidyasagar and Sri Ramakrishna being other significant names that played a pivotal role in bringing about a revolutionary social change.
India’s list of shame is long and it is the evidence that time and again, love failed. In collectivist cultures, ‘punishments’ are carried out not to thwart others but, to mollify the conscience of the patriarchal society. A recent survey suggested that parents often make false allegations of sexual harassment against the daughters’ love interest. Informal social systems have a significant role to play in these heinous crimes. The 73rd and 74th Amendment Acts of the Indian Constitution, allowed Panchayats a constitutional status. However, in certain parts of the country, informal systems like Khap Panchayats pass stringent judgements, most of which are based on ancient customs and beliefs. Thus, in spite rulings by the Supreme Court, oppositions from Khaps to obstruct a marriage between two consenting adults becomes illegal. They will call for a diktat (an order or decree imposed by someone in power without popular consent) against couples. Diktats are not justifiable before any court of law, but they are acceptable by communities, and are directed towards bolstering a feudal order. Honour killings are not just constricted to India, they happen in Pakistan, Sweden, Morocco, United States, Turkey and Mexico, to name a few.
Landmarks achieved in the fight against Honour Killing:
- Manoj – Babli Case, 2007
The murder of Manoj Banwala and Babli, back in June 2007 is a reflection of the level of barbarism that honour brings along with it. They both hailed from Kaithal, a city in the state of Haryana. After receiving news of their marriage, the Khap Panchayat initially stated that any person keeping ties with them would be charged a fine of INR 25,000. They were later found and brought before the Panchayat. The Khap ruled that since both Manoj and Babli belonged to the same “gotra”, it rendered them as siblings, and thus any romantic relationship between them would be unsound and carnal. After being kidnapped, Babli was forced to consume pesticides by her brother while Manoj was asphyxiated in front of her.
Court’s decision— Manoj’s mother, Chanderpati always defended the couple. Post the double-murder, she struggled to find a lawyer to fight the case and ultimately managed to bring in a lawyer from a neighbouring city. This was the first case that resulted in convictions of all the defendants, including the Khap panchayat. All the five main accused were sentenced to death— the first capital punishment in an honour killing case in India. A police officer (appointed for their protection) was dismissed from duty for leaving them alone and the driver involved in kidnapping was sentenced to 7 years in jail.
Honour killings are largely underreported, and this was the first of its kind where the groom’s family filed a case of honour killing. However, the leader of the Panchayat, Ganga Raj (Babli’s grandfather) got away with a death sentence because he intentionally left the scene during the killing. Chanderpati was hailed for the fight she put up against the dreaded Khap Panchayats, but she still receives threats to this day and believes it will not stop till the day Ganga Raj is convicted. District Judge Vani Gopal Sharma also received threats post the verdict. Later, the accused appealed to the Punjab and Haryana High Court and their sentence was reduced to a life imprisonment.
Important Case Laws:
- Shakti Vahini v. Union of India, 2018
A Writ petition was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. It sought directions to the respondents– the Central and State Governments to order preventive measures to curb the occurrence of honour killings. A Writ of Mandamus was issued to the State Governments to launch separate prosecutions for honour killings. The Court asserted that choice is an inseparable facet in Liberty and Dignity. The Court referred to the 242nd Report submitted by the Law Commission of India – “Prevention of interference with the freedom of matrimonial alliances (in the name of honour and tradition)”. The guidelines were as follows:
- Fast-track courts for fighting honour killing cases.
- Disposal of cases would be within 6 months
- Immediate FIR (First Information Report) against Khap Panchayat in cases of issuance of diktats
- Provision of safehouses by the Government, along with security
- Superintendent of Police will supervise the safehouses
- State of Maharashtra v. Eknath Kisan Kumbharkar, 2019
The High Court upheld the judgements made in Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi). It was further emphasised that “honour killing” has become commonplace, particularly in Haryana, western Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan. Many people feel that they are dishonoured by the behaviour of the young man/woman, who is related to them or belonging to their caste, because he/she is marrying against their wish or having an affair with someone, and hence they take the law into their own hands and kill or physically assault such person or commit some other atrocities on them, which is wholly illegal. “If someone is not happy with the behaviour of his daughter or other person, who is his relation or of his caste, the maximum he can do is to cut off social relations with her/him, but he cannot take the law is not his own hands by committing violence or giving threats of violence”. Kumbharkar was awarded the death penalty for killing his daughter along with her 9-month-old fetus, for marrying a man outside the caste.
Why India needs separate laws for honour killings:
Honour killings are similar to homicides and violate a number of already existing laws. Sections 299 and 301 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 state that culpable homicide amounts to murder and because the act of killing the victim is done with the intention to restore the lost honour of the family, honour killings are in serious violation of this law. Equality before law under Article 14 and equal rights before law upholds that every citizen should be treated equally irrespective of caste, creed, sex, race and religion – every honour killing is committed because either there are two castes involved or there is a marriage within the same caste. Article 19 and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution uphold Right to Freedom and Right to Life. In honour killing cases, these rights of an individual are violated. No one should have the right to kill in the name of honour.
Honour crimes are deep-rooted in patriarchal cultures of age-old discrimination. Right to life of no one should be conditional on whether or not they are obeying the social norms. This unholy nexus between the murderers and the Khap leaders, works against the upliftment of people and mindsets. This nexus needs to be torn down with stringent implementations of honour killing specific Acts and Laws, which will help in fighting this patriarchal pandemic.
REFERENCES:
http://www.humanrights.ch/upload/pdf/070419_ Kvinnoforum_HRV.pdf
Gezer M. Honor killing perpetrators welcomed by society. Today’s Zaman, 12 Jul 2008.
Amnesty International. Pakistan: Honor Killings of Girls and Women.
Amnesty International. Broken Bodies, Shattered Minds: Torture and Ill Treatment of Women. 6th Mar 2001.
Hassan Y. Heaven Becomes Hell: A Study of Domestic Violence in Pakistan. Lahore: Shirkat Gah, 1995.
Honor Killing. The Oxford Dictionary of Law Enforcement. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
