This article is for educational and legal awareness purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice or solicitation. Please consult a qualified advocate for advice on specific legal matters.
Introduction
In a recent order passed in March 2026, a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court comprising Justice JJ Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena granted interim protection to a couple facing threats from the woman’s family on account of their marriage. The Court observed that “no individual can make an ‘honour issue’ out of a consenting adult marrying a person of their own choice” and directed the State to ensure the safety of the petitioners.
Background
The petitioners — a married couple — approached the High Court seeking protection against threats and harassment from the woman’s family members who were opposed to the marriage. The opposition appeared to stem from inter-caste or inter-faith considerations. The couple alleged that the woman’s family had threatened them with physical harm and had also attempted to file criminal complaints against the husband, including under Section 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 (which deals with kidnapping or abducting a woman to compel marriage).
The Court’s Observations
The Division Bench made the following key observations:
-
Right to marry is a fundamental right — The right to marry a person of one’s own choice is an integral part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. This right cannot be curtailed by family members on the basis of caste, religion, or social status.
-
“Honour” cannot override constitutional rights — The Court observed that the concept of “family honour” cannot be permitted to override the constitutional right of an individual to choose a life partner. No person — whether a parent, sibling, or community member — has the authority to dictate whom a consenting adult may marry.
-
State’s duty to protect — The State has an affirmative obligation to protect the life, limb, and property of persons who face threats on account of their marriage choices, even when those threats emanate from their own family members.
Directions Issued
Note: This is an interim order in proceedings still pending before the Court as of the date of publication (next hearing: 8 April 2026).
The Court granted the following interim reliefs:
- The petitioners were granted interim protection against arrest in connection with any complaint filed by the woman’s family
- The woman’s family members were restrained from causing any harm to the couple or attempting to contact them
- The police were directed to ensure the safety of the couple
- The matter was listed for the next hearing on 8 April 2026
Precedents Relied Upon
- Shakti Vahini v. Union of India (2018) 7 SCC 192 — The Supreme Court directed States to take preventive measures against honour killings, held the right to choose a life partner a fundamental right under Article 21, and mandated creation of special cells and safe houses.
- Lata Singh v. State of U.P. (2006) 5 SCC 475 — The Supreme Court directed police protection for inter-caste couples and held that honour killings amount to murder.
Takeaway
Section 87 BNS, which criminalises kidnapping or abducting a woman to compel marriage, is inapplicable where the woman has married of her own free will. A complaint filed under that provision in such circumstances may be challenged as an abuse of process. Persons facing family threats arising out of a voluntary marriage may seek interim protection under Article 226, and a false criminal complaint filed by the woman’s family may itself attract penal consequences.
Note: When seeking relief from the High Court against orders of subordinate criminal courts, the appropriate provision is Article 227 (supervisory jurisdiction), not Article 226 writ jurisdiction — see Article 226 Writ Not Maintainable Against Judicial Orders of Criminal Courts — Allahabad HC Explains.
Useful Resources
- LiveLaw — Full Report
- Indian Kanoon — Shakti Vahini v. Union of India
- Indian Kanoon — Lata Singh v. State of U.P.
Disclaimer: The information provided on this website is for general legal awareness and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, advertisement, or solicitation. No reader should act or refrain from acting based on this information without seeking professional legal counsel. Advocate Akhil Singh and this website are not liable for any actions taken based on the content provided herein.