In a plea raising urgent concerns of alleged honour killing threats, the Supreme Court declined to intervene at the threshold and directed the runaway couple to approach the jurisdictional High Court instead, reinforcing the importance of procedural hierarchy even in matters involving personal liberty and immediate protection.
The matter was mentioned before a Bench led by the Chief Justice of India after an advocate brought to the Court’s notice the plight of a young inter-state couple who had fled their homes fearing violent reprisals from their families. It was argued that the couple faced serious threats, including warnings of physical harm, and had even approached a police station in Delhi, where instead of protection, they were allegedly detained.
Counsel highlighted the urgency, stating that the couple had come to the national capital under the mistaken belief, fuelled by social media, that the Supreme Court could directly facilitate their marriage and provide immediate shelter. The plea also pointed to systemic gaps, including the lack of accessible safe houses for such vulnerable couples.
The Bench, however, declined to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 32, stressing that the High Court remains the appropriate forum for such relief. Emphasizing judicial discipline, the Court cautioned against bypassing established remedies, observing that litigants should not treat High Court jurisdiction with a “stepmotherly” approach. It further noted that such cases often involve complex factual considerations requiring closer scrutiny at the local level.
Expressing confidence in the High Court’s responsiveness, the Bench remarked, “Go to the HC and I am sure the HC will consider this today itself.” Consequently, the plea was not entertained, with liberty granted to move the High Court for urgent protection.
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!