Honour killing in a very simple term means the killing of a person by family members who believe that the victim's activities have brought disgrace or dishonour upon the family is known as "honour killing," which is a serious violation of human rights. These terrible offences are primarily committed against women and girls who violate social expectations by using their freedom to choose a life partner, dress in various ways, or express their independence. Men may also be criticised out, particularly if they are in relationships with people from different castes or religions.

Honour killings, despite their cultural and societal roots, are illegal under most national laws and human rights norms, and they are not authorised by religion. The killings in India highlight the intense conflict between personal liberty and rigid social norms, which frequently results in terrible and deadly ends. Honour killings are frequently committed by close family members, perhaps even with the help of the community, which reflects established patriarchal values that put the reputation of the family before the rights of the person. Honour killing, which is acknowledged internationally as a human rights issue, puts pressure on governments and society to uphold laws that safeguard individual liberty and to address the cultural norms that encourage such acts of violence.

Historical Background of Honour Killing

Honour killings have a long history; records of such customs in ancient Mesopotamian communities, where family honour was valued highly, exist. One of the first legal texts, the Code of Hammurabi, outlines the severe punishments for actions considered dishonourable. Similar practices were followed in mediaeval Europe, when women's conduct was associated with family status and deviation from accepted social norms was treated with violence. In Mediterranean and Middle Eastern countries, where the idea of "honour" held families and communities responsible for maintaining moral behaviour, these customs were also prevalent.

The idea that a woman's behaviour directly affected the family's reputation was strengthened by patriarchal beliefs that governed women's behaviour in many countries. Family and societal expectations were the primary limitations on women's duties, and any effort to break from them-whether by getting married or making personal choices-was viewed as an assault on the family's honour. These ancient customs continue despite modernisation, particularly in South Asia and the Middle East. Honour killings still occur today in cultures that still prioritise family honour over individual liberties, which feeds discrimination and gender inequity. This historical background emphasises how urgently progressive legislation is needed to oppose these deeply rooted customs and defend individual liberties.

Reasons for Honour Killing:

Honour killings are caused by a confluence of psychological, social, and cultural elements, frequently associated with patriarchal expectations and the need to preserve family honour. Among the main causes are:

• Protection of Social Order: Love marriages, particularly those between castes or religions, are viewed as disruptive to the established social order in many cultures. Families react aggressively to such relationships because they are viewed as disobeying social standards.
• Patriarchal Control: The autonomy of women is limited in patriarchal society, and any display of independence, including selecting a spouse, puts male-dominated power structures in jeopardy. Thus, honour killings serve as a means of enforcing control over women's decisions.
• Moral Policing by the Family and Community: In order to prevent being socially excluded, families frequently experience pressure from the greater society to take action against alleged violations. Fear of losing status or respect in the community is a common driving force for honour killings.
• Fear of Cultural Dilution: Families may take extreme steps to avoid interfaith or marriages between castes because they believe that they undermine cultural purity.

Honour killings are essentially an example of society's demands being placed above individual liberties. In order to address the fundamental causes, it is necessary to address deeply entrenched cultural values that prioritise family reputation over individual rights, which is a reflection of the larger problem of gender-based violence and human rights.

Indian Legal Framework of Honour Killing:

Although India does not have a particular legislation that addresses honour killings, there are additional laws that offer protection and legal remedies in an indirect manner:

• Fundamental Rights (Indian Constitution): Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 collectively safeguard individual rights, including the right to equality, freedom of choice, and personal liberty. Honour killings directly violate these constitutional protections.
• The Special Marriage Act, 1956: This act offers a legal framework for interfaith and inter-caste marriages, protecting couples from family opposition. It allows couples to marry without the need for religious or caste-based consent, thus promoting secular marriages.
• The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: Although this act is specifically for Hindu marriages, it upholds the right to marry freely within the religion and reinforces personal choice in marital decisions.
• Indian Majority Act, 1857: This act establishes 18 as the age of majority, asserting that adults have autonomy over personal decisions, including marriage.
• Indian Evidence Act, 1872: This act limits the admissibility of family honour as a defence, preventing accused parties from justifying violence as a means of protecting family reputation.
• Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023: The recently amended version of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) includes modernized provisions that criminalize acts infringing on personal freedoms, aligning with contemporary human rights standards.

Although there are loopholes in effective enforcement due to the absence of particular legislative provisions targeting honour-based violence, these laws collectively offer a basis for prosecuting individuals involved in honour killings.

Law Presently on Honour Killing
Currently, honour killings are prosecuted under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 with provisions for murder and assault.

Key sections include:

• Section 103 (Murder): Prescribes life imprisonment or the death penalty for individuals convicted of murder, applicable to cases of honour killings.
• Section 109 (Attempt to Murder): Addresses cases where honour killings are attempted but do not result in death, with severe punishments for those convicted.
• Section 61 (Criminal Conspiracy) and Section 3 (5) (Acts Done by Several Persons in Furtherance of Common Intention): These sections are critical in cases where multiple family members or community members conspire in honour killings, ensuring joint liability for all involved.

Despite these provisions, the law enforcement's job is made more difficult by the lack of legislation specifically addressing honour killings. It is difficult to address the different reasons and organised nature of honour killings due to the BNS's broad structure, which frequently permits accused people to claim social considerations as a defence. Thus, establishing specific laws for honour-based violence might make prosecution easier and make the law's position against these crimes clearer.

International Laws Regarding Honour Killing

International human rights law strongly condemns honour killings, recognizing them as a form of gender-based violence and a gross violation of human rights.

Key international frameworks include:

• Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR): Articles 3, 5, and 16 enshrine the right to life, prohibition of cruel treatment, and freedom in marriage, establishing a basis against honour-based violence.
   
• Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW): CEDAW obligates member states to take measures to prevent gender-based violence, including honour killings, providing a robust framework for addressing these crimes.
   
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR): Article 6 guarantees the right to life, while Article 23 ensures freedom in marriage and personal choice, relevant to honour killings where familial or societal interference is common.

Although cultural barriers sometimes make enforcement difficult, several nations, like Jordan and Turkey, have changed their laws to specifically criminalise honour killings. Honour killings are classified as hate crimes in Western countries, and their specific characteristics are addressed by particular criminal law measures. Recognising the cultural obstacles that frequently make attempts to end such violence more difficult, the UN consistently pushes for stricter legislation and enforcement measures to address honour crimes.

Bill Proposed in the Parliament Regarding Honour Killing

The Indian Parliament has discussed on a number of legislative proposals in response to the increasing number of honour killing incidents. The Honour Killing Bill, also known as the Prevention of Crimes in the Name of 'Honour' and Tradition Bill, was presented in the Lok Sabha in 2010 with the intention of making honour killings a clear crime and imposing particular penalties on those who commit them.

The bill suggested changes to current legislation, including harsher penalties for family members and community organisations involved in honour killings. It included clauses that would make threats, harassment, and intimidation pertaining to alleged family embarrassment offences. The bill also sought to hold community panchayats, especially Khap Panchayats (traditional village councils), accountable, as they are often implicated in endorsing or ordering such killings to maintain "social order."

A number of rights organisations and legal activists supported the measure, although it has encountered obstacles in Parliament. Supporters stress the necessity for a separate legislation to specifically handle honour-based violence, while others argue that it is irrelevant given the BNS's current provisions. The bill's provisions, which signalled a zero-tolerance approach against honour-based violence, also aimed to change public perceptions. The bill indicates the urgent need for targeted legislation in this area and, although not having been implemented, is nevertheless a crucial step in India's legislative attempts to fight honour killings.

Judicial Precedents in India & World

Indian and global judicial systems have set significant precedents in cases of honour killing. In India, landmark cases like Shakti Vahini v. Union of India (2018) have established a clear legal stance. The Supreme Court, in this case, highlighted that honour killings are a flagrant violation of the fundamental rights that each individual has been guaranteed within the Indian Territory by the Indian Constitutional particularly the right to life and liberty. The court emphasized that the caste system or family honour cannot override an individual's personal freedom, directing states to establish measures for the protection of couples at risk.

In another landmark Indian case, Lata Singh v. State of U.P. (2006), the court emphasized that adults have the right to choose their partner, and family interference that leads to violence is unlawful. This judgment further set a precedent for protecting personal choice and condemning family-instigated violence under the guise of honour.

Internationally, in Opuz v. Turkey (2009), the European Court of Human Rights held Turkey accountable for failing to prevent an honour killing, marking a critical global precedent that emphasizes state responsibility. In Jordan and Pakistan, similar rulings in their respective courts have been transformative and condemning honour killings and clarifying that family honour cannot justify violence.

These precedents serve as guiding principles, reinforcing that honour killings are not only criminal acts but also severe human rights violations. Such judgments pave the way for stronger laws and societal change, underlining the judiciary's role in protecting individual rights.

Indian Supreme Court's Views on Honour Killings

The Indian Supreme Court has repeatedly held that honour killings are cruel and unlawful. The Supreme Court in Shakti Vahini v. Union of India (2018) held that honour killings are unacceptable in a democracy that respects individual liberty. In order to successfully discourage such murders, the court ordered state governments to set up special cells for the protection and surveillance of spouses, run awareness campaigns, and guarantee that cases involving honour killings are handled fast.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court condemned community organisations like Khap Panchayats for encouraging caste-based discrimination and supporting honour killings in the case of Arumugam Servai v. State of Tamil Nadu (2011). The court highlighted the state's obligation to protect individual liberties from social biases by ruling that no person or group has the right to restrict constitutional rights on the grounds of protecting family honour.

The Supreme Court has called for certain laws addressing honour killings, viewing it as a necessary step to ensure that perpetrators face stringent consequences. These judgments are important in the judiciary's fight against honour killings, reinforcing the constitutional safeguards on personal liberty, equality, and life under Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Indian Constitution.

Law Ought to be on Honour Killing as per Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita

In an effort to improve the Indian legal system, the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) has provisions that punishes honour killings and they are prosecuted under the provisions for murder and assault. Honour killings are organised and communal in nature, regulations might amend the BNS in the near future and add certain provisions that designate Honour Killings as a separate crime within the BNS framework, with harsher punishments than ordinary murder. Joint accountability might be made clear by such provisions, particularly for family members or community councils that plan such murders.

The BNS might offer direction on the burden of proof in the context of honour killings, stating that if the accused was associated with other conspirators, they would have to demonstrate that their actions were independent. All those involved in or supportive of honour killings may be held jointly liable under BNS, enhancing the legal accountability of family members and community leaders in these situations.

This strategy is necessary to reduce the power of traditional organisations like Khap Panchayats and to discourage group acts of violence that are excused by family honour. Furthermore, the by adding such provisions the BNS would strengthen protection for people against parental and social tyranny by specifically addressing honour-based violence, highlighting the fact that cultural customs cannot violate the constitutional rights to liberty, personal independence, and life.

Conclusion
Honour killing, which mostly affects those who prefer to exercise autonomy over their relationships and lifestyle, is a cruel example of society's control over personal decisions. The continued practice of honour killings highlights the difficulty in striking a balance between custom and individual rights, even in the face of current legal systems in India and abroad. In addition to violating the fundamental human right to life, honour killings uphold structural discrimination against people on the basis of gender, caste, and religion.

It is crucial to have a strong judicial system that particularly targets honour killings. To remove the deeply rooted principles that underpin these crimes, social education must be accompanied by effective enforcement of constitutional protections, such as the right to equality, liberty, and personal choice.

In India, clearer legislation that criminalizes honour killings explicitly and the proactive stance of the judiciary are crucial steps forward. Furthermore, international cooperation and pressure on nations where honour killings are common can aid in increasing awareness and advancing legislative reforms on a worldwide scale. In order to destroy the patriarchal and cultural ideologies that support honour killings and create a more just and compassionate society, awareness-raising and education campaigns are ultimately more important than law enforcement.

Written By: Sriganesh Ji, a third-year student at Lloyd School of Law in Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, pursuing a B.A. LLB. I feel strongly about writing and conducting legal research, and I endeavour constantly to add valuable input to the legal community. Reach out to me at [email protected] if you are willing to work together on writing articles and research papers.