<p>The Karnataka government is drafting a law to punish those causing “grievous hurt” to a couple or any one of them in the name of “honour” with a rigorous imprisonment of at least 10 years, which may be extended to life imprisonment, and a fine up to Rs 3 lakh. </p>.<p>The Karnataka Freedom of Choice in Marriage and Prevention and Prohibition of Crimes in the Name of Honour and Tradition Bill, 2026, comes against the backdrop of the murder of Manya Patil in Hubballi, allegedly by her own family for marrying a person from a Scheduled Caste (SC) community.</p>.<p>The proposed law has also been called ‘Eva Nammava Eva Nammava Kanoonu, 2026,’ named after a famous Vachana by 12th-century reformer and anti-caste advocate Basavanna. This name is said to have been suggested by Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H K Patil.</p>.Tourism project at Roerich Estate: Karnataka High Court directs state, Centre to ensure no activities on ground .<p>According to section 3(1) of the Bill, “All persons shall have the right to autonomy over their own lives, including the rights to liberty, freedom of expression, and freedom to marry a person of their choice”.</p>.<p>Section 3 (3) explains that the consent of parents, family, caste or clan is not necessary once two individuals agree to enter into a marriage.</p>.<p>The Bill imposes a minimum five-year imprisonment in addition to the punishment under Bharatiya Nyaya Samhita (BNS) for those killing in the name of honour. </p>.<p><strong>False marriage promise</strong></p>.<p>It also criminalises sexual intercourse by false promise of marriage in inter-caste alliances with a rigorous punishment of at least 5 years of imprisonment, which may be extended to life imprisonment and a fine.</p>.<p>Any person who engages in sexual intercourse with an adult woman by giving assurance or promise of marriage, and subsequently refuses to fulfil such promise upon disclosure or knowledge of the woman’s caste, shall be deemed to have obtained consent by deceitful means or under misconception of fact, thereby committing an offence punishable as rape under the draft Bill.</p>.<p>As per the Bill, if there is prima facie evidence that the refusal to marry was motivated “solely or primarily” by opposition to the inter-caste nature of the alliance, it is to be presumed (rebuttable presumption) that the promise of marriage was “false” from the inception or vitiated by “deceit”.</p>.<p>The Bill further notes that the burden to prove that the promise was made in “good faith” or was due to “unforeseen circumstances unrelated to caste” rests on the accused.</p>.<p>However, the Bill makes it clear that the above clause doesn’t apply to cases of “genuine breaches of promise due to circumstances beyond control”, or where the woman is aware from the outset that marriage was improbable on caste grounds without any assurance overriding such awareness.</p>.<p><strong>Protection</strong></p>.<p>The proposed legislation states that anyone exercising their rights under section 3, or being a victim under this Act, can seek protection for themselves, their dependents and witnesses against any kind of intimidation, or coercion or inducement, or violence or threat to violence. </p>.<p>It mandates the state to make arrangements for the protection of victims, their dependents, witnesses, etc., adding that the police must provide protection within six hours. The state government is also obligated to provide shelter to couples in need of shelter.</p>.<p>A senior official told DH that the Bill mandates the police to provide protection both in cases where marriage has already occurred and where it is likely.</p>.<p>The Bill states that the state government should identify districts, sub-divisions and/or villages where crimes in the name of honour or tradition have been reported in the last five years. </p>.<p>It mandates the government to create a Special Cell to prevent such crimes in every district. The Bill also empowers the district magistrate to constitute an ‘Iva Nammava Vedike’, comprising a retired judge, police officer, revenue officer, sub-registrar and others prescribed by the government. The Vedike (forum) shall facilitate solemnisation of marriage, provide counselling services and function as prescribed.</p>.<p>The Bill also mandates setting up special fast-track courts for the purpose of trying cases coming under its purview. </p>
<p>The Karnataka government is drafting a law to punish those causing “grievous hurt” to a couple or any one of them in the name of “honour” with a rigorous imprisonment of at least 10 years, which may be extended to life imprisonment, and a fine up to Rs 3 lakh. </p>.<p>The Karnataka Freedom of Choice in Marriage and Prevention and Prohibition of Crimes in the Name of Honour and Tradition Bill, 2026, comes against the backdrop of the murder of Manya Patil in Hubballi, allegedly by her own family for marrying a person from a Scheduled Caste (SC) community.</p>.<p>The proposed law has also been called ‘Eva Nammava Eva Nammava Kanoonu, 2026,’ named after a famous Vachana by 12th-century reformer and anti-caste advocate Basavanna. This name is said to have been suggested by Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H K Patil.</p>.Tourism project at Roerich Estate: Karnataka High Court directs state, Centre to ensure no activities on ground .<p>According to section 3(1) of the Bill, “All persons shall have the right to autonomy over their own lives, including the rights to liberty, freedom of expression, and freedom to marry a person of their choice”.</p>.<p>Section 3 (3) explains that the consent of parents, family, caste or clan is not necessary once two individuals agree to enter into a marriage.</p>.<p>The Bill imposes a minimum five-year imprisonment in addition to the punishment under Bharatiya Nyaya Samhita (BNS) for those killing in the name of honour. </p>.<p><strong>False marriage promise</strong></p>.<p>It also criminalises sexual intercourse by false promise of marriage in inter-caste alliances with a rigorous punishment of at least 5 years of imprisonment, which may be extended to life imprisonment and a fine.</p>.<p>Any person who engages in sexual intercourse with an adult woman by giving assurance or promise of marriage, and subsequently refuses to fulfil such promise upon disclosure or knowledge of the woman’s caste, shall be deemed to have obtained consent by deceitful means or under misconception of fact, thereby committing an offence punishable as rape under the draft Bill.</p>.<p>As per the Bill, if there is prima facie evidence that the refusal to marry was motivated “solely or primarily” by opposition to the inter-caste nature of the alliance, it is to be presumed (rebuttable presumption) that the promise of marriage was “false” from the inception or vitiated by “deceit”.</p>.<p>The Bill further notes that the burden to prove that the promise was made in “good faith” or was due to “unforeseen circumstances unrelated to caste” rests on the accused.</p>.<p>However, the Bill makes it clear that the above clause doesn’t apply to cases of “genuine breaches of promise due to circumstances beyond control”, or where the woman is aware from the outset that marriage was improbable on caste grounds without any assurance overriding such awareness.</p>.<p><strong>Protection</strong></p>.<p>The proposed legislation states that anyone exercising their rights under section 3, or being a victim under this Act, can seek protection for themselves, their dependents and witnesses against any kind of intimidation, or coercion or inducement, or violence or threat to violence. </p>.<p>It mandates the state to make arrangements for the protection of victims, their dependents, witnesses, etc., adding that the police must provide protection within six hours. The state government is also obligated to provide shelter to couples in need of shelter.</p>.<p>A senior official told DH that the Bill mandates the police to provide protection both in cases where marriage has already occurred and where it is likely.</p>.<p>The Bill states that the state government should identify districts, sub-divisions and/or villages where crimes in the name of honour or tradition have been reported in the last five years. </p>.<p>It mandates the government to create a Special Cell to prevent such crimes in every district. The Bill also empowers the district magistrate to constitute an ‘Iva Nammava Vedike’, comprising a retired judge, police officer, revenue officer, sub-registrar and others prescribed by the government. The Vedike (forum) shall facilitate solemnisation of marriage, provide counselling services and function as prescribed.</p>.<p>The Bill also mandates setting up special fast-track courts for the purpose of trying cases coming under its purview. </p>
