The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of major individuals in inter-caste or inter-religious marriages to police protection in the face of threats or fear for their lives, as well as the preventive, remedial, and punitive measures against honor crimes.

JUDGMENT

Satyendra Kumar Singh, J. - Petitioners have filed the present petition seeking police protection. According to them, they are major and performed their marriage, but they are receiving threat from their parents.

2. If the petitioners are major and entered into the marriage voluntarily, then they should not be harassed by any one, just because they have objection with their marriage. In future, if the petitioners receive any threat or fear to their life from anyone, in order to avoid any harassment, the petitioners are certainly entitled for police protection.

3. That, in case of Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. Another : AIR 2006 SC 2522, the Apex Court has observed as under:

this is free and democratic country and once a person becomes a major he or she likes. If the parents of the boy or girl do not approve of such inter caste of inter religious marriage the maximum they can do is that they can cut-off social relation with the son or daughter, but they can give threats or commit of instigate acts of violence and cannot harass the person undergoes such inter caste or inter religious relationship marriage. We therefore direct that the administrative/ police authorities throughout the country will see to it that if any boy or girl who is major, the couple are harassed by any one nor subjected to threats or acts of violence and may one who gives such threats or harass or commit acts of violence either himself of at his instigation is taken to task by instituting criminal proceedings, by the police against such person and further stem action is taken against such persons as provided by law

4. The Apex Court in the matter of Khap Panchayat has taken up the issue of Honuor Killing'' very seriously and issued certain preventive, remedial punitive measures to all the State Governments. The relevant direction passed in case No. 231/2010 (Shakti Vahini vs. State of M.P.) decided on 27.03.2018 are as under:-

To meet the challenges of the agonising effect of honour crime, we think that there has to be preventive, remedial and punitive measures and,accordingly, we state the broad contours and the modalities with liberty to the executive and the police administration of the concerned States to add further measures to evolve a robust mechanism for the stated purposes.

I. Preventive Steps:-

(a) The State Governments should forthwith identify Districts, Sub-Divisions and/or Villages where instances of honour killing or assembly of Khap Panchayats have been reported in the recent past, e.g., in the last five years.

(b) The Secretary, Home Department of the concerned States shall issue directives/advisories to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned Districts for ensuring that the Officer Incharge of the Police Stations of the identified areas are extra cautious if any instance of inter-caste or inter-religious marriage within their jurisdiction comes to their notice.

(c) If information about any proposed gathering of a Khap Panchayat comes to the knowledge of any police officer or any officer of the District Administration, he shall forthwith inform his immediate superior officer and also simultaneously intimate the jurisdictional Deputy Superintendent of Police and Superintendent of Police.

(d) On receiving such information, the Deputy Superintendent of Police (or such senior police officer as identified by the State Governments with respect to the area/district) shall immediately interact with the members of the Khap Panchayat and impress upon them that convening of such meeting/gathering is not permissible in law and to eschew from going ahead with such a meeting. Additionally, he should issue appropriate directions to the Officer Incharge of the jurisdictional Police Station to be vigilant and, if necessary, to deploy adequate police force for prevention of assembly of the proposed gathering.

(e) Despite taking such measures, if the meeting is conducted, the Deputy Superintendent of Police shall personally remain present during the meetin