http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4  

CASE NO.: Writ Petition (crl.)  208 of 2004

PETITIONER: Lata Singh

RESPONDENT: State of U.P. & Another

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 07/07/2006

BENCH: Ashok Bhan & Markandey Katju

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T

MARKANDEY KATJU, J.

This writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India has  been filed with a prayer for issuing a writ of certiorari and /or mandamus  for quashing the Sessions Trial No. 1201 of 2001 under sections 366 and  368 of the Indian Penal Code arising out of FIR No. 336 of 2000 registered  at Police Station Sarojini Nagar, Lucknow and pending in the Fast Track  Court V, Lucknow.

       The facts of the case are as under:         The petitioner is a young woman now aged about 27 years who is a  graduate and at the relevant time was pursuing her Masters course in Hindi  in the Lucknow University.  Due to the sudden death of her parents she  started living with her brother Ajay Pratap Singh at LDA Colony, Kanpur  Road, Lucknow, where she did her intermediate in 1997 and graduation in  2000.

       It is alleged by the petitioner that on 2.11.2000 she left her brother’s  house of her own free will and got married at Arya Samaj Mandir, Delhi to  one Bramha Nand Gupta who has business in Delhi and other places and  they have a child out of this wedlock.

Thereafter on 4.11.2000, the petitioner’s brother lodged a missing  person report at Sarojini Nagar Police Station, Lucknow and consequently  the police arrested two sisters of the petitioner’s husband along with the  husband of one of the sisters and the cousin of the petitioner’s husband.  The  persons arrested were Mamta Gupta, Sangita Gupta (sisters of Brahma Nand  Gupta), as well as Rakesh Gupta (husband of Mamta Gupta) and Kallu  Gupta cousin of the petitioner’s husband.  Mamta was in jail with her one  month old child.

It is further alleged that the petitioner’s brothers Ajay Pratap Singh,  Shashi Pratap Singh and Anand Pratap Singh were furious because the  petitioner underwent an inter-caste marriage, and hence they went to the  petitioner’s husband’s paternal residence and vehemently beat up her  husband’s mother and uncle, threw the luggage, furniture, utensils, etc. from  the house and locked it with their lock.  One brother of the petitioner’s  husband was allegedly locked in a room by the petitioner’s brothers for four  or five days without meals and water.  The petitioner’s brothers also  allegedly cut away the harvest crops of the agricultural field of the  petitioner’s husband and sold it, and they also took forcible possession of the  field.  They also lodged a false police report alleging kidnapping of the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4  

petitioner against her husband and his relatives at Police Station Sarojini  Nagar, Lucknow, due to which the sisters of the petitioner’s husband, and  the husband of one of the sisters, were arrested and detained in Lucknow  jail.  The petitioner’s brothers also illegally took possession of the shop of  the petitioner’s husband.  The petitioner’s husband has a shop at Badan  Singh Market, Rangpuri in the name of Gupta Helmet Shop whose  possession was forcibly taken over by her brothers. It is further alleged that the petitioner’s brothers are threatening to kill  the petitioner’s husband and his relatives, and kidnap and kill her also.  The  Gupta family members are afraid of going to Lucknow out of fear of  violence by the petitioner’s brothers, who are of a criminal bent.      It is alleged that the petitioner’s husband and relatives have been  falsely framed by her brothers Shashi Pratap Singh, Ajay Pratap Singh and  Anand Pratap Singh who were furious because of the inter-caste marriage of  the petitioner with Bramha Nand Gupta.  Mamta Gupta, Rakesh Gupta and  Sangita Gupta were arrested on 17.12.2000, whereas Kallu Gupta was  arrested on 02.12.2000.  It is alleged that the three relatives of the  petitioner’s husband were not granted bail for a long time and their lives got  ruined though there was no case against them that they instigated the  petitioner to get married to Bramha Nand Gupta.  It is also alleged that the  petitioner ran from pillar to post to save her husband and relatives from  harassment and she then approached the Rajasthan Women Commission,  Jaipur, as she was staying in Jaipur almost in hiding apprehending danger to  her and her husband’s life.  The Commission recorded her statement on  13.3.2001 and the same was forwarded to the Superintendent of Police  (City), Lucknow for necessary action.  The President of the Rajasthan State  Women Commission also wrote a letter to the National Human Rights  Commission on 13.3.2001 requesting the Commission and the Chief  Secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh, to intervene in the matter.        

A final report was submitted by the SHO, Police Station Sarojini  Nagar, Lucknow before the learned Judicial Magistrate inter-alia  mentioning that no offence was committed by any of the accused persons  and consequently the learned Sessions Judge, Lucknow enlarged the accused  on bail on furnishing a personal bond on 16.5.2001 by observing that neither  was there any offence nor were the accused involved in any offence.  The  Superintendent of Police, Lucknow informed the National Human Rights  Commission that all the accused persons have been released on bail on  17.5.2001.

Thereafter the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of the  petitioner Lata Gupta @ Lata Singh on 28.5.2001 and for this purpose armed  security was provided to her.  The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,  Lucknow recorded the statement of the petitioner under section 164 Cr.P.C.   on 29.5.2001.  In that statement the petitioner stated that she married  Bramha Nand Gupta of her own free will.  Despite this statement, the  learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow passed the committal order on  5.10.2001 ignoring the fact that the Police had already filed a final report in  the matter.

It appears that a protest petition was filed against the final report of  the Police alleging that the petitioner was not mentally fit.  However, the  petitioner was medically examined by the Board of Doctors of Psychiatric  Centre, Jaipur, who have stated that the petitioner was not suffering from  any type of mental illness.

The Fast Track Court, Lucknow before whom the case was pending  issued non-bailable warrants against all the four accused, and against the  order of the Fast Track Court, the accused filed a petition under section 482  Cr.P.C. in the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) which was registered  as Crl. Misc. No. 520/2003. The High Court directed the accused to appear  before the Sessions Judge who would himself scrutinize whether the accused  committed any offence or not.   The matter is still pending.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4  

The petitioner alleged that she cannot visit Lucknow as she  apprehends danger to her life and the lives of her husband and small child.   She has further alleged that her brothers have assaulted, humiliated and  irreparably harmed the entire family members of her husband Bramha Nand  Gupta and their properties, and even the remote relatives were not spared  and were threatened to be killed. Their properties including the house and  agricultural lands and shops were forcibly taken over by the brothers of the  petitioner and the lives of the petitioner and her husband are in constant  danger as her brothers have been threatening them.

We have considered the above facts and have heard learned counsel  for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State Government.

This case reveals a shocking state of affairs.  There is no dispute that  the petitioner is a major and was at all relevant times a major.  Hence she is  free to marry anyone she likes or live with anyone she likes.  There is no bar  to an inter-caste marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act or any other law.   Hence, we cannot see what offence was committed by the petitioner, her  husband or her husband’s relatives.

We are of the opinion that no offence was committed by any of the  accused and the whole criminal case in question is an abuse of the process of  the Court as well as of the administrative machinery at the instance of the  petitioner’s brothers who were only furious because the petitioner married  outside her caste.  We are distressed to note that instead of taking action  against the petitioner’s brothers for their unlawful and high-handed acts  (details of which have been set out above) the police has instead proceeded  against the petitioner’s husband and his relatives.

Since several such instances are coming to our knowledge of  harassment, threats and violence against young men and women who marry  outside their caste, we feel it necessary to make some general comments on  the matter.  The nation is passing through a crucial transitional period in our  history, and this Court cannot remain silent in matters of great public  concern, such as the present one.  

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, inter-caste  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 inter-caste  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 inter-religious 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 inter-caste or inter- religious 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 inter-caste or inter-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. We sometimes hear of ‘honour’ killings of such persons who undergo  inter-caste or inter-religious 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.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4  

In the circumstances, the writ petition is allowed.  The proceedings in  Sessions Trial No. 1201/2001 titled State of U.P. vs. Sangita Gupta & 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 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.

We further direct that in view of the allegations in the petition (set out  above) criminal proceedings shall be instituted forthwith by the concerned  authorities against the petitioner’s brothers and others involved in  accordance with law.  Petition allowed.