This Content Is Only For Subscribers
India’s honour killing belt – spanning Haryana, Rajasthan and western Uttar Pradesh – has been the site of a horrifying surge in murders justified as protecting family “honour.” Over the past decade, dozens of couples and individuals in districts like Rohtak (Haryana), Muzaffarnagar (UP) and Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan) have been slaughtered by relatives for defying caste, kinship or patriarchal norms.
This hard-hitting report delves into the roots of these crimes, the official response, and the desperate voices of victims’ families and activists, supported by data and legal records. It exposes how entrenched patriarchy, caste-based councils and institutional apathy have allowed these atrocities to continue – and what must be done to stop them.
The ‘Honour Killing Belt’: Geography of Violence
The phrase “honour killing belt” is used by NGOs and journalists to describe a contiguous region of northern India where such murders are disproportionately common. In Haryana, Punjab-border districts like Rohtak, Hisar and Kaithal see frequent cases; in western Uttar Pradesh, Muzaffarnagar and Shamli top the list; and in northwest Rajasthan, districts such as Jhunjhunu and Churu are hotbeds of caste-related killings.
These rural, agriculturally wealthy areas share strict kinship rules (exogamous caste/gotra norms) enforced by powerful clan councils called khap panchayats. Break these rules, and families often call it “dishonour” – even if it means murder. (For example, villagers in Rohtak’s Garnauthi admitted a college couple was killed for defying caste taboos.) This report focuses on these districts not only because of their murder rates, but also because they starkly illustrate the deadly mix of patriarchy, caste custom and corruption that fuels honour violence here.
Motives Behind Honour Murders
While inter-caste or inter-religious marriages are the most notorious triggers, the motives for so-called honour killings are varied and deeply rooted in power. The chief factors include:
- Caste and Kinship Codes: Marrying within the same gotra (clan) or outside one’s caste/religion can be deemed “out of bounds.” Families and khap panchayats issue edicts forbidding such unions, treating them like incest or betrayal.
- Patriarchal Control: Families believe a woman’s (or man’s) choice of partner reflects on their honour. As one Haryana police officer noted, “In Haryana, the intersection of patriarchy… and caste has had disastrous consequences”. Fathers and brothers claim the right to kill women or lovers who “dishonour” the family.
- Social Pressure and Councils: Khaps and village elders often endorse or order such murders. Human Rights Watch reported that in Haryana, Punjab and UP, village councils routinely pass judgment on couples and condone killings for “dishonour”. Local officials sometimes turn a blind eye.
- Property and Family Disputes: At times murders over inheritance or disputes are recorded as “honour” crimes to mask other motives. (Police and lawyers note that lucrative land or business conflicts can hide under the honour killing label.)
- Other Factors: Killings also occur over issues of alleged impropriety (e.g. “inappropriate” phone conversations), family feuds, or even rejected marriage proposals.
Many victims never even planned marriage – courtships, elopements or rumours suffice. As one villager coldly admitted after a Rohtak killing: “If my daughter did this, I would have killed her…no matter what happens to me,” reflecting widespread acceptance of such murders. In effect, entire rural communities often see honour killing as maintaining social order.
Tragedy on the Ground: High-Profile Cases
A survey of notable cases illustrates the horrors and variety of these crimes across the belt:
- Rohtak, Haryana: In 2013, college sweethearts Dharmender and Nidhi Barak were lured home by Nidhi’s family and brutally slain for deciding to marry. The father of the slain girl confessed he’d “do it again” if needed. The couple’s families refused to even lodge complaints, saying “they got what they deserved”. This case, widely reported, typifies Haryana honour murders: Jat villagers upholding gotra rules with lethal violence.
- Farhana Parvez, Muzaffarnagar, UP: On June 28, 2023, Farhana and her husband Shahid (married against caste wishes) were ambushed in village Alipur Aterna. Farhana, a pregnant mother, was killed by relatives on a busy village road. A fast-track court later sentenced six family members to life, but four women relatives were acquitted for lack of evidence – showing how easily cases can stall. The remorselessness of her killers and the reluctance of witnesses typify many investigations.
Figure: Fast-track court in Muzaffarnagar delivered six life sentences in an honour killing case – though four accused were acquitted for lack of evidence.
- Ankit Jat, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan: In August 2024, 25-year-old Ankit (a Jat) and his new wife Monika Rajput (a Rajput) were attacked in Mahpalwas village. Ankit’s brother-in-law and 10 others ambushed him as he bathed, severing his hand with a sword before shooting him dead. Monika, who had married despite threats, survived. The attackers even fired on Ankit’s mother. Police say Ankit’s family had begged for protection before the carnaget. This case underscores that even where murders are caught on camera, justice is hard-won.
Figure: Ankit Jat (left) with his wife Monika Rajput. He was shot dead and mutilated by relatives in Jhunjhunu in 2024 over their inter-caste marriage.
- Other Recent Cases: A June 2024 spike in Haryana saw three honour killings in one month, including the notorious Tejbir–Meena killing. In this Hisar case, a married couple were shot dead in a public park. Prior to their murder, both had lived in police protection; the superintendent bluntly remarked “there is no honour in killing”. Other recent stories from Kaithal, Sirsa and Narnaul (Haryana) involve daughters strangled for talking on phones, sisters gunned down, etc. In Rajasthan’s Hanumangarh and Punjab’s Sangrur, young couples have been eliminated in front of police stations. Each story shares the same pattern: love or autonomy challenged by brutal conservatism.
These narratives are borne out by victims’ accounts. Survivors and families speak of terror and betrayal. (For example, after eloping, a Punjab couple recounted being trapped overnight before their murders.)
Hindu-right groups like Shakti Vahini have documented dozens of such accounts. Social workers note that even a handshake between a man and woman from different castes can trigger violence. Activists warn that for each headline case there are many unrecorded murders, often labelled “suicide” or “accident” to spare the perpetrators.
Official Figures and Trends (2014–2024)
Government data confirm a steep, recent rise in reported “honour” killings. NCRB figures (citing motives in murder cases) show: 28 cases in 2014, 251 in 2015, and 77 in 2016. (This sudden jump in 2015 – up 796% over 2014 – likely reflects both a real increase and improved reporting.) Official numbers dipped afterward, with NCRB reporting 25 in 2019, 25 in 2020 and 33 in 2021.
However, experts caution these are vast undercounts: many slayings go unregistered as honour crimes or unreported altogether. For perspective, an NGO study once estimated over 900 such murders in just Haryana, Punjab and UP combined (though this cited non-government surveys).
The Supreme Court of India has also taken note. In Shakti Vahini vs. Union of India (2018), the Court upheld the right of consenting adults to marry without family consent and mandated that states implement guidelines to protect couples.
The Centre’s Ministry of Home Affairs issued an advisory in May 2018 (citing this judgment) directing every district to create special “honour crime” cells and 24-hour helplines for threatened couples. In practice, implementation has been uneven across Haryana, Rajasthan and UP. Many states struggle with gaps: few districts have dedicated cells, victims are reluctant to approach police, and helplines often go unanswered.
Conviction vs. Acquittal: Court outcomes paint a grim picture of justice denied. Fast-track courts have secured some convictions – as in Muzaffarnagar above – but acquittals and delays are common. For instance, in Farhana’s Muzaffarnagar case, 6 men got life in prison, yet 4 women relatives walked free for “insufficient evidence”.
Lawyers note that witnesses frequently retract statements out of fear. A 2010 study found India’s overall murder conviction rate to be only 2–3%; it is believed the rate for honour killings is similarly dismal. Delay is another factor: trials can drag on for years. Families of slain couples often lament that “the law takes its own sweet time” while accused roam free on bail.
Voices from the Ground
The chilling confidence of perpetrators is evident in their words. When one Haryana father was jailed for beheading his daughter Dharmendra’s girlfriend, he openly declared: “I have no regrets. I’ll do it again if I have to”. Even ordinary villagers supported the killing: Roshni, a neighbor, said, “If my daughter did this, I would have killed her with my bare hands”. Such statements capture a mentality so ingrained that murder is seen as restoring honour.
By contrast, the victims’ side is mostly silent or broken. Few family members of victims testify; they too may share the shame or fear for their own safety. Survivors and social workers speak of constant threats.
One survivor campaigner told The Swaddle that “marriage ought to be a woman’s choice… the number of women who die by suicide because they are not able to be with a partner of their choice is also distressingly high” – underscoring the despair that leads some lovers to flee or even die by suicide under pressure.
Police and Judiciary: Patterns of Response
Over the last decade, police and courts have shown mixed results. On the one hand, law enforcement occasionally acts decisively: dozens of accused have been arrested and charged (often under Section 302 IPC for murder). Fast-track courts in Haryana and UP have been set up for these crimes. Recent convictions (like the Muzaffarnagar case or life sentences in Rohtak) send a stern message.
On the other hand, institutional apathy remains rampant. Reports of police inaction abound – sometimes officers tell couples to “settle it within the family.” In Shakti Vahini’s Supreme Court petition, activists detailed numerous instances where police refused to register FIRs or delayed them. Even after arrests, low priority is given to honour cases compared to other murders.
As retired IPS officer S.T. Ramesh observes: “In so-called honour killing cases, usually a family member commits the crime. Other family members… cover up, despite knowing about the crime”. He warns that this “conspiracy of silence” by relatives and local officials means many cases never come to light. Police themselves admit killers show pride rather than remorse: one investigator noted of Haryana youths, “They don’t believe they have done anything wrong”.
Judicial delays and lenient charges also undercut justice. Since Indian law treats honour murders simply as murder, not a special offense, trials rely on standard evidence rules. Few states pay for witness protection, so fear prevails. Moreover, convicted killers often appeal for years.
As Subrata Mukherjee, a political analyst, observed: “unless you reform the legal setup… the real perpetrators normally go free… the prosecution rate is very low”. Nationwide, honour killing prosecutions occupy only a tiny fraction of court dockets – even as families wait years in limbo.
Comparative Perspectives
India’s honour killings are part of a global pattern of “shame” violence. In Pakistan, the problem is arguably worse: official figures recorded nearly 1,100 women killed in the name of honour in 2015, and NGOs have documented thousands more over decades. (Pakistan has since amended its laws to limit “blood money” defenses, but practice persists in rural areas.)
In the Middle East, Jordan reported about 23 honour killings per year on average; until recently, its penal code even allowed leniency for “adultery” killings (though Article 340 was curtailed in 2017). Turkey has also struggled with this crime: a 2008 report found over 200 women were murdered for honour in 2007, with over 1,000 cases in Istanbul and other cities over five years.
In each country, patriarchal norms and weak enforcement let honour killers evade harsh justice for years. International human rights bodies condemn these practices; many nations are now strengthening laws. For example, Jordan amended its penal code to remove “fury” defenses, and Turkey’s courts have increasingly handed whole families life terms (one Kurdish family of 5 was jailed for life in 2009).
These comparisons highlight India’s urgent need for reform. Global best practices suggest the following: strict laws explicitly criminalizing honor crimes, special protection for threatened couples, and unambiguous court messaging that such murders are premeditated murder with no honour. While India shares traits with these countries, the scale here is unique – and the solutions must be homegrown, too.
Policy Gaps and Recommendations
Despite repeated calls, India still lacks a dedicated “anti-honour killings” law. As one op-ed notes, there is “no perfect law to punish these barbaric crimes”. Current IPC provisions (murder, kidnapping, etc.) are piecemeal and offer loopholes.
Activists have drafted a model bill – the Freedom of Marriage and Prohibition of Crimes in the Name of Honour Act, 2022 – which contains many sensible measures. Among its proposals:
- Treat honour crimes as non-bailable offenses and apply Section 302 (murder) as mandatory punishment.
- Reverse the burden of proof in honor cases (so accused must show they did not kill, not vice versa).
- Ensure fast-track courts for honour murders, with strict timelines (for example, 6-month trial windows).
- Mandate police protection for threatened couples before any incident, and forbid police from harassing or inquiring any couple on family complaints.
- Provide witness-protection and government compensation to victims’ families (financial relief and rehabilitation).
- Declare that individual rights to marry cannot be overridden by family, caste or kinship.
Critically, states must implement the Supreme Court’s 2018 guidelines. Every district should have a trained SP-level “Honour Crimes Cell” with social workers, psychologists and legal aid to follow up threats. Helplines and NGOs must be funded to counsel runaway couples 24/7.
Haryana and Rajasthan have taken some steps (e.g. fast-track courts in Rohtak), but these are fragmented. Uniform statewide policies – such as Haryana’s draft “Agnipath” scheme of providing security to inter-caste couples – should be enacted and properly staffed.
Law enforcement also needs attitudinal change. Police academies should train officers to treat honour-killing complaints as urgent crimes, not ‘family matters’. The Union Home Ministry should publicly record conviction and acquittal rates in honour cases to spur accountability.
As activist groups note, public awareness campaigns are vital: celebrating the 2018 SC ruling (marrying without consent is a right) can help shift minds in these districts. Grassroots work, including through local women’s and Dalit groups, can provide safe shelters and legal help to couples.
Finally, broader social reforms are essential. Honour killings stem from treating women as family property – so women’s empowerment (education, property rights, jobs) strikes at the problem’s heart. Khaps and panchayats that issue kill orders must be legally curtailed and their leaders punished for incitement.
Politicians and teachers in these regions must speak out; when leaders send a clear message that every lover’s life matters more than family pride, the climate slowly changes.
Recommendations (Summary):
- Legislative: Amend law to specifically outlaw honour crimes as murder; make them non-bailable; reverse burden of proof; codify SC guidelines into law.
- Judicial: Dedicated fast-track courts; ensure strict witness protection; set targets for timely trials.
- Police: Implement district Honour Crime Cells with 24×7 helplines; immediate FIRs on any honour threat; penalize officers who refuse registration.
- Social: Crack down on khap panchayats; fund advocacy and counselling; launch state-led awareness that “love is no crime.”
- Compensation: Guarantee state support and rehabilitation for survivors and victims’ families, to reduce social ostracism.
Until these measures take root, the belt of honour killings will keep claiming more lives. As one human rights campaigner grimly noted, these murders are “utterly without honour,” yet in practice they pass with near-impunity – a stain on India’s justice system and the human rights of its citizens.
It is time for an uncompromising national effort: because the “cost of honour” has been paid in blood far too often.
Sources and Citations
- NCRB and Government Data on Honour Killings
- Supreme Court Shakti Vahini v. Union of India (2018) – Directions as quoted in MHA advisory
- Times of India, Hindustan Times, NDTV, Tribune, and other news reports on cases in Rohtak (Dharmender-Nidhi), Muzaffarnagar (Farhana), Jhunjhunu (Ankit)
- Hindustan Times (Namita Bhandare) – “Dying for love: The shame of modern India”(2024)
- New Indian Express – “Killing honour in the name of ‘honour killings’”(2023)
- UN Women statement (2018) and reporting on Farzana Parveen (Muzaffarnagar case) – (as noted by reporters)
- Human Rights Watch – “India: Prosecute Rampant ‘Honor’ Killings” (2010)
- Wikipedia and international reports on honor killings in Jordan, Pakistan, Turkey
- The Swaddle – draft bill and activist quotes on honour killings (2022)
(Additional references are cited inline above. Each image and quote is sourced to the cited content.)
*You May Be interested in Reading this investigative piece by the same author, “The Missing Billions: How India’s Electoral Bonds Scheme Changed Political Funding Forever“.
*Learn More About The Author Here.
