NEW DELHI: Drawing lessons from the brutal murder of Nitish Katara , the Delhi high court on Wednesday gave an impassioned call to treat the malaise of “honour killing” as a separate offence .

“Honour killing is a class of offences by itself,” Justice Gita Mittal wrote in her judgment, saying the motivation stems from “a deeply entrenched belief in the caste system” which is “completely unacceptable”. She called for a “serious examination as to why such murders are not categorized as separate offences in the penal provision”.

While terming Nitish’s murder as “honour killing”, the high court said the case brings to the fore a malaise that still afflicts Indian society rooted in entrenched social structures based on religion, caste and economic standing.

“What is of special concern is that such divisive forces exist even on the borders of Delhi — the nation’s capital, which is also a cosmopolitan city,” HC said.

“The right to choose your life partner or whom you associate with is a fundamental right; it is an integral part of the right to life,” said the bench which also comprised Justice J R Midha. It noted that an individual’s privacy of marriage and dignity are essential parts of the right to life guaranteed in the Constitution and the view has been upheld by various judicial pronouncements.

Referring to the Katara case, HC highlighted how Bharti’s family was opposed to her association or any kind of alliance with Nitish Katara on the ground that he was not from the same caste and belonged to a service class family. “The case manifests that even in a household belonging to the highest class in society, (one in which you can make day trips with friends from Ghaziabad to Mumbai just to celebrate a birthday, own multiple businesses and properties, luxury vehicle etc.) what can happen to even a young, educated, articulate daughter if she attempted to break away from the conventional caste confines and explored a lifetime alliance with a member of another caste. Especially (with) one who was also perceived to be of a lesser economic status,” it said.

The bench noted that while Bharti was a Yadav and came from a well-placed business class family with her father being an MP, Nitish was a Katara and his father was in government service and was certainly not in the same income bracket as Bharti’s family.