Marriage embodies personal freedom, respect, the right to privacy, and individual freedom. The Supreme Court of India has acknowledged that consenting adults have the right to choose their partners irrespective of the objection of their families, religion, castes, and/or community. In the Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M. case, the Court honored personal freedom. In the case of threats, harassments, and/or violence, couples can seek help from the police and can avail of appropriate judicial remedies.
Why Supreme Court Protection for Couples Matters
The protection of the couples is particularly important wherein the family or community opposition develops into threats or coercion.
Understanding the constitutional position helps couples to:
- Understand their right to choose a life partner;
- Protect themselves from unlawful threats and harassment;
- Approach the police when their safety is at risk;
- Seek protection from the High Court where necessary;
- Understand the distinction between family disapproval and unlawful interference;
- Preserve evidence of threats or intimidation;
- Take timely preventive action against possible violence; and
- Understand their rights in inter-caste and interfaith marriages.
The Supreme Court has made it very clear that the constitutional rights cannot be sacrificed merely to satisfy the notions of the family, caste or community honour. In the case of Shakti Vahini v. Union of India, the Court recognized the right of consenting adults to choose each other as their life partners and directed the authorities to take the preventive, remedial as well as the punitive measures against the honour crimes.
Right to Choose a Life Partner
The Constitution, through Article 21, recognizes the right of every adult to choose a partner of his/her choice and also ensures that the right to life and personal liberty are strongly guarded.
According to the Supreme Court, choice is a fundamental aspect of life and dignity of an individual. The Court also held that the choice of a person regarding marriage can be a matter of personal interest that families and society cannot control.
In its judgment in the Shafin Jahan case, the Supreme Court held that the choice of a partner remains with the person, irrespective of social or legal obstacles. The Court maintained that marriage is considered an essential personal domain and does not require approval from society.
The crux of the matter is that if two adults are legally capable and are willing to marry, their families can’t act against their wishes, whatever be the disapproval of the families.
What the Supreme Court Has Said About Love Marriage
The Supreme Court has not formulated any specific law under the name of “love marriage law.” However, its rulings have clarified significant constitutional provisions regarding marriage, individual choice, privacy, dignity and protection from violence.
The Court’s jurisprudence establishes that:
- Adults have autonomy in choosing their partners;
- Family consent is not ordinarily required for the marriage of competent adults;
- Caste or community objections cannot override constitutional rights;
- Social or family honour cannot justify violence;
- Khap panchayats or community groups cannot act as extra-constitutional authorities;
- The State has a duty to protect individuals whose life or liberty is threatened; and
- Police and administrative authorities must take appropriate preventive and remedial steps where there is a genuine threat.
The Supreme Court has also emphasized that the choice of a life partner is an aspect of individual dignity. A later Supreme Court judgment reaffirmed that the autonomy to choose a spouse or life partner is an integral part of the right to live and referred to earlier decisions including Asha Ranjan, Shafin Jahan, Nandakumar and Soni Gerry.
Important Supreme Court Judgments on Choice of Partner
A. Lata Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh
The Supreme Court in Lata Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh addressed the repercussions that an adult woman married to a person of her choice faced.
This ruling establishes the important principle that adult women are free to choose their spouse and that relatives cannot resort to unlawful actions simply on account of their disapproval of the marriage.
The decision became an important foundation for the protection of inter-caste and self-choice marriages.
B. Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M.
This judgment is one of the most significant decisions concerning an individual’s choice of spouse.
The Supreme Court restored the marriage of Hadiya and emphasized that the choice of a partner is part of personal liberty and autonomy. It held that the courts cannot substitute their own assessment for choice of the competent adult merely because the society or family members disapprove of that choice.
C. Shakti Vahini v. Union of India
This is the leading Supreme Court judgment concerning honour crimes and protection of couples.
The Court recognized that when the two adults voluntarily choose each other as the life partners, their choice is protected by the constitutional principles. It directed State authorities to develop preventive, remedial and punitive mechanisms to address honour crimes.
The Court specifically required States to establish mechanisms including special cells and measures through which threatened couples could seek assistance and protection.
D. Nandakumar v. State of Kerala
The Supreme Court also recognized that the right to choose a partner cannot be restricted merely because the parties face social objections. The Court’s broader jurisprudence treats the individual choice and autonomy as central components of constitutional liberty.
Supreme Court Guidelines Against Honour Crimes
Honour crimes are the most serious threats faced by the couples whose relationships are opposed by the families or communities.
In the case of Shakti Vahini, the Supreme Court issued the directions covering the preventive, remedial as well as the punitive measures against honour crimes.
The Court’s framework recognizes that the authorities should not wait until the violence actually occurs. Where credible information indicates that a couple is facing threats, preventive measures may be necessary.
The broader principles include:
- Identifying areas vulnerable to honour-related violence;
- Creating mechanisms through which threatened couples can approach authorities;
- Taking complaints of threats seriously;
- Providing appropriate protection where danger is established;
- Promptly registering and investigating criminal offences;
- Taking action against persons involved in violence or intimidation; and
- Ensuring that community bodies do not unlawfully interfere with marriages between consenting adults.
The Supreme Court has also made it clear that caste elders, panchayatdars or similar community authorities have no right to interfere with the life and liberty of young couples whose marriages are permitted by law.
Protection Available to Couples Facing Threats
A couple facing threats may approach the local police authorities and submit a written complaint describing the nature of the threat.
Depending upon the circumstances, they may also approach senior police officers or seek appropriate relief from the High Court.
Protection may become particularly important where there are allegations of:
- Threats to kill or physically harm the couple;
- Forced confinement;
- Attempts to forcibly separate the partners;
- Kidnapping or wrongful restraint;
- Repeated stalking or intimidation;
- Threats from relatives or community members;
- Coercion to end the relationship;
- Threats because of inter-caste marriage;
- Threats because of interfaith marriage; or
- Attempts to subject the couple to an unlawful community decision.
The right remedy varies from case to case. In a protection petition, the situation, the individuals who pose a threat to the couple, relevant events, the evidence available, and the specific types of danger should be addressed.
Role of Police and State Authorities
The police authorities have constitutional and statutory responsibility to protect life and liberty.
Where the credible threat exists, the authorities should assess the situation and take lawful preventive measures. The purpose of protection is not to decide whether the family approves of the marriage. The focus should be on preventing unlawful acts and protecting the individuals concerned.
The Supreme Court’s honour-crime jurisprudence places emphasis on preventive action rather than waiting for a serious offence to occur.
At the same time, protection does not mean that every dispute between family members automatically requires permanent police security. Authorities generally assess seriousness and credibility of threat and act according to law.
Inter-Caste and Interfaith Marriages
Inter-caste and interfaith marriages often face stronger social opposition in some of the communities.
However, caste or community disapproval cannot by itself eliminate the constitutional autonomy of competent adults.
The Supreme Court has specifically rejected the idea that social notions of “honour” can override the individual’s constitutional freedom. In Shakti Vahini, the Court held that the choice of two consenting adults cannot be allowed to succumb to “class honour” or “group thinking.”
In Shafin Jahan, the Court similarly emphasized that even matters of faith cannot be used by the State or courts to dictate a person’s choice of partner where the individual is competent to make that decision.
The legal validity of a particular marriage, however, depends upon the compliance with applicable marriage law and facts of the case.
Can Family Members Prevent an Adult Couple From Marrying?
In general, simply being at loggerheads does not mean that family members have the legal right to stop two adult individuals from making their own decisions.
It is possible to disagree with one’s parents, but a disagreement is not the same as an unlawful act of coercion.
Family members cannot legally resort to violence, threats, confinement, or intimidation to persuade an adult person to leave a relationship.
A community or caste body cannot act as a court of law and enforce its own penalty on a couple.
Where unlawful acts occur, the persons responsible may face criminal or other legal consequences depending upon the conduct and applicable law.
Legal Remedies Available to Couples
Depending upon the circumstances, couples may consider:
Police Complaint: A written complaint can be submitted to the police station describing the threat and requesting immediate preventive action.
Complaint to Senior Police Authorities: Where the local police do not adequately respond, the couple may approach senior police officers with copies of the earlier complaint and supporting evidence.
High Court Protection Petition: In appropriate circumstances, a couple may approach the jurisdictional High Court seeking protection of life and liberty. The exact legal provision and form of proceedings depend upon the facts and relief sought.
Criminal Proceedings: If threats, assault, confinement, stalking, kidnapping or other offences have occurred, appropriate criminal proceedings may be initiated under the applicable law.
Habeas Corpus in Appropriate Cases: Where an adult is allegedly being unlawfully confined or detained, appropriate constitutional remedies may be considered depending upon the facts.
A court considering such a matter may focus particularly on the individual’s voluntary choice, age, circumstances and whether there is unlawful interference with personal liberty.
Documents and Evidence for Seeking Protection
Couples should preserve relevant evidence, particularly where threats have already been made.
Useful documents may include:
- Identity and age proof;
- Marriage certificate, where already married;
- Photographs or other evidence of marriage;
- Proof of residence;
- Copies of police complaints;
- Threatening messages or emails;
- Call records or other relevant evidence, where lawfully available;
- Screenshots of threatening communications;
- Details of persons allegedly making threats;
- Medical records in cases involving physical violence; and
- Any previous court or police documents.
Practical Steps for Couples Facing Threats
The couples facing the serious opposition should consider following practical measures:
- Keep copies of identity and marriage documents safely.
- Inform trusted persons about the safety concern.
- Preserve threatening messages and other evidence.
- Make a written complaint where a genuine threat exists.
- Keep acknowledgment of complaints submitted to authorities.
- Avoid unnecessary confrontation with threatening persons.
- Seek for immediate emergency assistance if at all there is an imminent threat.
- Consult a lawyer regarding appropriate protection proceedings.
- Do not sign documents under coercion.
- Maintain records of subsequent incidents or threats.
- Seek medical assistance and preserve medical records if violence occurs.
- Consider the appropriate legal protection before the situation escalates.
Most importantly, the couples should not assume that they have to tolerate the threats simply because their families oppose their relationship.
How Lead India Can Help
Lead India can assist individuals and couples in understanding their legal options where they face difficulties relating to love marriage, family opposition or threats.
Legal assistance may include:
- Explaining the constitutional and legal rights of adults choosing their life partners;
- Assisting with preparation of police complaints;
- Guiding couples regarding appropriate protection proceedings;
- Helping identify the appropriate court or authority;
- Reviewing documents and evidence relating to threats;
- Assisting in matters involving inter-caste or interfaith marriages;
Providing legal guidance where family members allegedly use coercion or intimidation; and Helping couples understand available legal remedies.
A couple should not first consult a lawyer in cases where they perceive an immediate risk to their life or physical safety, instead they should contact the relevant police and emergency services.
The highest court in the country has affirmed that adults who are competent can make the decision as to whom to marry without any unlawful intervention from family, caste and community. Cases such as Shafin Jahan and Shakti Vahini have saved lives and forced agencies to refrain from indulging in honour killings.
One can talk to lawyer from Lead India for any kind of legal support. In India, free legal advice online can be obtained at Lead India. Along with receiving free legal advice online, one can also ask questions to the experts online free through Lead India.
FAQs
1. Is love marriage legal in India?
Yes. The love marriage can be legally valid when parties satisfy requirements of the applicable marriage law and any other legal conditions.
2. Can the two adults marry without their parents’ consent of parents?
Generally, the competent adults do not require the parental approval merely because marriage is opposed by their families. The validity of marriage depends upon the compliance with applicable law.
3. Are the parents allowed to separate the married partners by force?
No, the parents are not at all allowed to use the violence, threats, unlawful confinement, or any of the other forms of coercion, because they dislike relationship or the marriage.
4. Can the inter-caste couple seek for the police protection?
Yes. Where ever there is genuine threat to life or liberty, the inter-caste couple can approach police and, wherever appropriate, can seek for the judicial protection. The Supreme Court has specifically recognized need to protect couples from the honour-based interference.
5. Can the interfaith couple seek for the protection?
Yes. The constitutional principles protecting individual autonomy apply to the lawful choices of the adult individuals. The Supreme Court has emphasized that choice of life partner is the part of individual liberty and it cannot ordinarily be dictated by State or society.
Talk to a Lawyer