Kiritkumar Bhikhabhai Rabari & vs State Of Gujarat & 6 on 8 July, 2016

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Kiritkumar Bhikhabhai Rabari & vs State Of Gujarat & 6 on 8 July, 2016

Bench: Sonia Gokani

                 R/SCR.A/4777/2016                                               ORDER




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

         SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION - POLICE PROTECTION)
                                       NO. 4777 of 2016

         ==========================================================
                  KIRITKUMAR BHIKHABHAI RABARI & 1....Applicant(s)
                                     Versus
                       STATE OF GUJARAT & 6....Respondent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         JIGAR J PATEL, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 - 2
         MR RUTUL P DESAI, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 - 2
         MR RONAK RAVAL, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) No. 1
         ==========================================================

         CORAM        HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
             :

                                       Date : 08/07/2016


                                        ORAL ORDER

1. By way of present petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for the following substantial reliefs :

"14(B) This Honourable Court may be pleased to issue suitable direction to the respondentsPolice Authority to provide adequate police protection to the petitioners herein as well as to the family members of the petitioner No.1 and also to ensure that the petitioners can enjoy their Page 1 of 6 HC-NIC Page 1 of 6 Created On Wed Jul 13 01:08:37 IST 2016 R/SCR.A/4777/2016 ORDER matrimonial life in a regular and routine manner without being having any fear, harassment or threats from the relatives of the petitioner No.2.

(C) This Honourable Court may be pleased to direct the respondentAuthority to lodge FIR against the Respondent no.4 to 7 as directed by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Lata Sing v/s. State of UP and ORS., reported in 2007(1) GLH 41;"

2.The petitioners herein are legally wedded couple, whose marriage was solemnised on July 02, 2016.

They are seeking police protection. Their marriage is an intercaste. A marriage certificate is also brought on record of the matter.

3.It is the say of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner appearing for the petitioners Shri Jigar Patel that despite the best of the efforts made by the petitioners to convince their parents, the parents of the petitioner No.2 have chosen to pressurise the petitioner No.2 to marry elsewhere with a boy of their choice and, Page 2 of 6 HC-NIC Page 2 of 6 Created On Wed Jul 13 01:08:37 IST 2016 R/SCR.A/4777/2016 ORDER therefore, they are apprehensive of their life and even afraid of honour killing. In support of his submissions, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Lata Singh v.

State of Uttar Pradesh, reported in AIR 2006 SC 2522.

4.Heard Shri Jigar Patel, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri Ronak Raval, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1State.

5. Having considered the contents of the petition and the material on record, as also the submissions made by both the sides as well as the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Lata Singh (supra), this Court is of the opinion that the petitioners deserve to be granted police protection. At this stage, it would be profitable to regurgitate the relevant observations and findings of the said decision, which read as under :

Page 3 of 6

HC-NIC Page 3 of 6 Created On Wed Jul 13 01:08:37 IST 2016 R/SCR.A/4777/2016 ORDER "17. The caste system is a curse on the nation and the sooner it is destroyed the better. In fact, it is dividing the nation at a time when we have to be united to face the challenges before the nation unitedly.

Hence, intercaste marriages are in fact in the national interest as they will result in destroying the caste system. However, disturbing news are coming from several parts of the country that young men and women who undergo intercaste marriage, are threatened with violence, or violence is actually committed on them. In our opinion, such acts of violence or threats or harassment are wholly illegal and those who commit them must be severely punished. This is a free and democratic country, and once a person becomes a major he or she can marry whosoever he/she likes.If the parents of the boy or girl do not approve of such inter caste or interreligious marriage the maximum they can do is that they can cut off social relations with the son or the daughter, but they cannot give threats or commit or instigate acts of violence and cannot harass the person who undergoes such intercaste or interreligious marriage. We, therefore, direct that the administration/ police authorities throughout the country will see to it that if any boy or girl who is a major undergoes intercaste or inter Page 4 of 6 HC-NIC Page 4 of 6 Created On Wed Jul 13 01:08:37 IST 2016 R/SCR.A/4777/2016 ORDER religious marriage with a woman or man who is a major, the couple are not harassed by any one nor subjected to threats or acts of violence, and any one who gives such threats or harasses or commits acts of violence either himself or at his instigation, is taken to task by instituting criminal proceedings by the police against such persons and further stern action is taken against such persons as provided by law.

18. We sometimes hear of 'honour' killings of such persons who undergo intercaste or interreligious marriage of their own free will. There is nothing honourable in such killings, and in fact they are nothing but barbaric and shameful acts of murder committed by brutal, feudal minded persons who deserve harsh punishment. Only in this way can we stamp out such acts of barbarism.

19.In the circumstances, the writ petition is allowed. The proceedings in Sessions Trial No. 1201/2001 titled State of U.P. v. Sangita Gupta and Ors. arising out of FIR No. 336/2000 registered at Police Station Sarojini Nagar, Lucknow and pending in the Fast Track Court V, Lucknow are quashed. The warrants against the accused are also quashed. The police at all the concerned places should ensure that neither the Page 5 of 6 HC-NIC Page 5 of 6 Created On Wed Jul 13 01:08:37 IST 2016 R/SCR.A/4777/2016 ORDER petitioner nor her husband nor any relatives of the petitioner's husband are harassed or threatened nor any acts of violence are committed against them. If anybody is found doing so, he should be proceeded against sternly in accordance with law, by the authorities concerned."

6. In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Lata Singh (supra), the present petition is hereby partly allowed. Let the respondent No.3Police Inspector, Gomtipur Police Station, Ahmedabad, look into the matter and provide requisite police protection to both the petitioners herein without further loss of time and shall ensure their safety. The duration of protection shall be decided by the respondent No.3 looking to the ground realities.

With above observations and directions, the present petition stands disposed of.

Direct service is permitted.

(MS SONIA GOKANI, J.) Aakar Page 6 of 6 HC-NIC Page 6 of 6 Created On Wed Jul 13 01:08:37 IST 2016

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court