Khap Panchayats have been in the news for functioning as extra-constitutional authorities, often delivering pronouncements amounting to human rights violations. Discuss critically the actions taken by the legislative, executive and the judiciary to set the things right in this regard.

Context

Khap panchayats — caste or clan councils concentrated in Haryana, western Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan — act as extra-constitutional authorities: issuing diktats against inter-caste and same-gotra marriages, enforcing social boycotts and instigating honour killings, in violation of Articles 14, 19 and 21.

Judiciary

• Lata Singh v State of UP (2006): consenting adults are free to marry; police must protect such couples from harassment.
• Arumugam Servai (2011): khap diktats declared wholly illegal; officials who fail to prevent honour crimes are to face administrative action.
• Shakti Vahini v Union of India (2018): interference with a lawful marriage between consenting adults is "absolutely illegal"; the Court laid down preventive, remedial and punitive directions — special police cells, safe houses and fast-track trials.

Legislature

• There is still no dedicated central law; honour killings are prosecuted under general penal provisions for murder and criminal intimidation.
• The Law Commission's 242nd Report (2012) drafted a Prohibition of Interference with the Freedom of Matrimonial Alliances Bill; Rajasthan enacted a similar state law in 2019.

Executive

• Following Shakti Vahini, States have created couple-protection cells, safe houses and helplines, with district officials made accountable for prevention.

Critical assessment

Implementation is patchy: convictions are rare, honour crimes are under-recorded, police often share the local social bias, and the central Bill has been pending for over a decade while khaps retain social legitimacy.

Conclusion

A specific central law, certain prosecution and social interventions — education and incentives for inter-caste marriage — must advance together.