Recently, the Delhi High Court has drawn attention to the transformative role of inter-caste unions in shaping an egalitarian society. Observing that such relationships transcend entrenched social barriers, the Court remarked that inter-caste marriages are not merely personal choices but acts that further the national interest by promoting social integration and diminishing caste divisions. The judgment once again highlighted the judiciary’s role as a guardian of individual autonomy against societal and familial constraints.
The case arose from a petition filed by an inter-caste couple who had shared a relationship for over eleven years and intended to solemnize their marriage. Their relationship, however, was met with severe opposition from the woman’s family, including her mother, sister, and brother-in-law, who allegedly issued threats and attempted to dissuade her from proceeding with the marriage. Fearing for their safety and freedom, the couple approached the Delhi High Court seeking protection from harassment and interference. The Delhi Police, represented before the Court, stated that a constable’s contact number had already been provided to the petitioners following an earlier complaint, ensuring immediate communication in case of any threat or untoward incident.
The Petitioners contended that their right to make independent choices regarding marriage and companionship was constitutionally protected under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. They asserted that their relationship, founded on mutual consent and emotional commitment, could not be subjected to familial or societal approval. They further argued that the continued threats from the woman’s relatives violated their fundamental rights to dignity, privacy, and freedom of choice, thereby necessitating judicial protection. The respondents, however, denied any unlawful interference but did not refute the existence of familial disapproval, emphasizing that the matter was a personal and domestic issue rather than one requiring police involvement.
Justice Sanjeev Narula, while considering the matter, relied upon the Supreme Court’s observations acknowledging that caste continues to exert a profound social influence in India. The Court reiterated that inter-caste marriages contribute significantly to the constitutional vision of equality by bridging social divisions and fostering national integration. Justice Narula emphasised that when two consenting adults decide to marry or cohabit, no family member or community body has any lawful authority to interfere with or obstruct their decision. The Court further noted that such unions, often facing societal hostility, must receive firm and effective protection from both the State and law enforcement agencies.
While refraining from commenting on the truth of the allegations made by the petitioners, the Court directed the Station House Officer of the concerned police station to conduct an immediate threat assessment of the couple and to take preventive measures in accordance with law. The directions included maintaining appropriate diary entries, ensuring patrolling near the couple’s residence, and initiating any other steps necessary to prevent harassment or intimidation. The Court clarified that these directions were preventive and protective in nature and did not amount to any finding on the personal or civil disputes between the parties.
Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.
Picture Source :
