Allahabad HC quashes FIR, grants protection to couple facing honour killing threats

Allahabad: The Allahabad High Court has delivered a significant order quashing an FIR and granting protection to an adult couple who married against the wishes of the woman’s family and faced threats to their lives.

Court Upholds Adult Couple’s Right to Marry, Citing Constitutional Protections

In an order passed on June 7, 2024, a Division Bench comprising Justices J.J. Munir and Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal quashed an FIR filed against the husband, identified as the second petitioner, under Section 363 (kidnapping) of the Indian Penal Code.

The court noted that the first petitioner, a 21-year-old woman, had stated under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code that she had left her home of her own free will on April 8, 2024, and married the second petitioner, an adult man, on April 17, 2024, according to Muslim rites in Hyderabad.

Further, the court also observed that even if the petitioners have not married each other, no one can restrain an adult from going anywhere he/she likes, staying with a person of his/her choice, or solemnizing marriage according to his/her will or wish. This right flows from Article 21 of the Constitution.

The court observed that the woman’s uncle had falsely implicated the second petitioner and was extending death threats. The woman had expressed apprehension in her statement that she would be killed, with the court noting that “honour killing in such matters is not an unknown phenomenon and it is very important to save a human life from extinction on account of misguided emotions or notions of morality. This issue is quite independent of the issue of matrimony that the parties have entered into. No citizen can kill another for holding a different opinion, and it is the foremost duty of the State to preserve human life.”

Magistrate Criticized for Failing to Act on Woman’s Fears Amidst Honour Killing Concerns

Expressing dismay, the court stated that the Magistrate, before whom the woman had expressed fear for her life, was duty-bound to register an FIR against her uncle and take measures to secure her safety, which was not done.

Referring to the criteria laid down in the Supreme Court’s decision in Bhajan Lal, the court held that the third criterion for quashing an FIR was applicable in this case, as the woman’s statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. contradicted the allegations in the FIR.

In conclusion, the court allowed the writ petition by quashing the impugned FIR and issued a mandamus to the Superintendent of Police, Siddharth Nagar, and the Station House Officer, Police Station-Bansi, to ensure that the woman goes wherever she likes and stays with whomever she chooses, without any hindrance from her uncle or any other family member. Additionally, the court warned the S.P. Siddharth Nagar and the Station House Officer, Police Station-Bansi, Siddharth Nagar, that if any harm or injury comes to the woman, the concerned authorities would be personally answerable to the court.