5 July 2021 2:46 PM GMT
While denying bail to a man for participating in the 'brazen act of honour killing' of his sister, the Allahabad High Court last week observed that there is no place for those citizens in the society who go to the extent of eliminating a family member for choosing a life partner of his/her choice."In the opinion of this Court, prima facie if these allegations were to be established at the...
While denying bail to a man for participating in the 'brazen act of honour killing' of his sister, the Allahabad High Court last week observed that there is no place for those citizens in the society who go to the extent of eliminating a family member for choosing a life partner of his/her choice.
"In the opinion of this Court, prima facie if these allegations were to be established at the trial, there is no place for citizens in our society who act in derogation of the much cherished constitutional values of individual liberty, and, instead, repose faith in archaic social values of family honour to an extent that they would go to eliminate a family member choosing a life partner for herself," the Court observed.
The Bench of Justice J. J. Munir was hearing the bail plea of a man who, along with other family members, allegedly eliminated her sister and also shot her husband to 'punish him' as the woman had married him contrary to the wish of her family members.
"Prima facie, it is a brazen case of honour killing where family members, including the deceased Jyoti's father, uncle, cousin and her brother have all participated to put an end to a young life on account of a false sense of family pride, which they have prima facie sought to redeem through this crime," observed the Court.
Applicant's Counsel had argued that the role assigned to him was of assaulting the injured witness Rohit Kumar and the role of shooting was assigned to the other co-accused, but not the applicant.
However, denying him bail, the Court observed that he was certainly an active participant in the entire episode, though he may not have wielded the gun or inflicted the fatal injury.
As per the case of the prosecution, it was a case of honour killing, inasmuch as Rahul and Jyoti (both dead) had married contrary to the wish of Jyoti's family since Jyoti was from a different caste than that of Rahul Kumar's and this had allegedly 'endangered' her family.
The assailants, in this case, included Jyoti's father, whereas the other co-accused included the woman's father's brother, her cousins and her own brother.
The AGA submitted that the assault, as a whole, was a brazen act of honour killing and a refusal by family members of Jyoti to abide by the constitutional values so dear to the law for ensuring the personal liberty of citizens.
It was also argued that Jyoti's family, going by the eyewitness account, had eliminated her to redeem their false notions of family honour and shot her husband also to punish him.
Case title - Gulshan v. State of U.P.
Click Here To Download Order