STATEMENT ISSUED BY ALL INDIA DEMOCRATIC WOMEN’S ASSOCIATION-

CENTRAL COMMITTEE- NEW DELHI

A recent judgement of the Madurai Bench Of Honourable Madras High Court in C.A.
222/2017 1.Sankaranarayanan2.Chellammal Vs State rep. by The Assistant Commissioner of
Police L&O, Palayamkottai Sub Division, Palayamkottai Police Station
dated 24.4.2018 made a shocking interpretation of “HONOUR KILLING” glaringly in
contravention of the Apex Court’s proposition exactly a month back on 27.3.2018 in Shakti
Vahini vs union of India and others upholding the right to choose life partner is a
fundamental right and framed certain guidelines to penalise honour crimes and protect the
victims.

In a case of elopement of a boy belongs to Scheduled Caste and girl belongs to

dominant caste, the parents of the girl murdered the boy’s sister in a cold blooded manner,
inflicting 10 cut injuries with 46 cm long sickle, in a broad day light in the very house of the
deceased.

The Special court in Tirunelveli, slapped death sentence to both the accused under
the provisions of IPC as well as “The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act-1989”. The High Court set aside the conviction of the second accused (mother
of the girl) and reduced the death sentence of the first accused to life term. The following are
the reasoning of the High court which is reproduced from the judgement in para.58 (the
points are numbered for easy perusal)

1. “As stated above, the occurrence has taken place due to the daughter of
the accused eloping with the brother of the deceased. Though element of
caste is involved to a certain degree, however, as held by this court
above, the evidence fall short of terming this case to be one of honour
killing. Though it could be said that the caste of the accused and the
deceased may be a contributing factor in the perpetration of crime,
however the same cannot be termed as a murder to save the honour.
2. “Neither the couples nor the family have been done away with, but only
the deceased”
3. What had taken place outside the house of the deceased before A.1
inflicted the fatal injuries is not known. It could have been the inability
of A.1 to secure his daughter back, which would could have resulted in
the killing due to mental strain and heat of the situation.(no plea by the
defence)
Therefore the case falls short of being termed as “Honour Killing” murder.”

When there was an elopement for an inter caste marriage, the accused belonging
to dominant caste and the deceased belonged to Scheduled caste and High Court has
also not figured out any other motive for the commission of crime, we are at a loss to
understand what else is needed to term it as an honour killing.

The High Court ‘s one of the reasoning is that the crime do not fall under the
ambit of honour killing if the couple or their family have not been done away with.
The same court agreed that the deceased is no one else but the sister of the boy. This
creates a doubt in the mind of civil society whether the institution of family will not
consist a married woman.

Further the reasoning that the murder might have been committed in the heat
of passion and frustration especially when the accused came with the 46 cm long
sickle and committed the murder, 10 days after the occurrence. If it is acceptable,
then all the honour killers will take advantage of the reasoning and roaming happily
in the society

This Judgement of the Madras High Court gives a go by to the Judgement of

the 3 judges bench of the Supreme Court headed by the Chief Justice of India in
(shakthi vahini Vs Union of India & others, W.P.No.231/2010)which
proclaimed that the right to choose life partner is a fundamental right; consent of
family, community, clan not necessary for marriage between two adults.

It further held that honour killing guillotines individual liberty, freedom of

choice and one’s own perception of choice. This was held in a case filed by a NGO
called Shakthi Vahini approached the court seeking directions to the state
government and central government to take preventive steps to combat honour
crimes. The Apex Court also framed guidelines.

While condemning the reasoning of the present judgement, it is relevant to

point out here that AIDWA welcomed the judgement of the same Madras High Court
Madurai bench (single Judge) in a case of Honour Killing of the similar nature
(Dilip Kumar Vs State, in W.P.No. 26991/2014) framing guidelines to protect
the couples of intercaste marriges among other reliefs next to the High Court of
Punjab and Haryana. The Victim girl (husband of the deceased) in that case was
protected and was assisted legally by Tamilnadu Untouchability Eradication Front
and AIDWA-TN
 These kind of killings are happening in our country in the name of saving the
honour of the family, especially in Northern parts of India by the orders of Khap
Panchayats.

Since there is no separate law defining honour crimes, many cases

disappeared into the arena of homicide. The Law Commission of India in its 242nd
report recommended a bill titled “The prohibition of interference with the
freedom of matrimonial alliances bill 2011” to prevent honour crimes due to
matrimonial alliance or marriages. Due to absence of political will, the bill is not yet
discussed and enacted.

The All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) is the fore runner in
the fight against honour crimes. Even in the present case, soon after the occurrence
AIDWA, Tamilnadu unit conducted protest demonstrations for getting justice for the
victims.

Now the AIDWA-TN itself explore the possibility of filing an appeal in the
Apex Court against this judgement of Madras High court as the interpretation of the
term Honour Killing and the reasoning behind the sentence will be a set back to the
fundamental right to choose life partner guaranteed by the Constitution of
India and further as against the Apex Court’s proposition.

one scholar shri. Faizan Mustafa said “Fundamental rights

being natural rights must be possessed by all human beings at all
points of time. No person can say ‘I do not want these rights’.
and therefore waiver of fundamental rights is not permissible”.
Otherwise there is every likelihood in future, that the culprits will use
this reasoning and will escape from the clutches of the Law.

Therefore, AIDWA demands

(i) The Central government should enact a special legislation for Honour
Crimes.
(ii) The state of Tamilnadu to file an appeal in the Apex Court against the
Judgement of the Division bench of Madras High court;
(iii) To immediately disburse the compensation amount to the victim’s
family; To provide protection to the deceased’s family.