Role of Police in Preventing Forced Marriages

Forced marriage is a serious violation of human rights where one or both parties are compelled to marry without free and full consent through coercion, threats, deception, or abuse of authority. The police play a frontline preventive, protective, and enforcement role in such cases, particularly under criminal law, special protection statutes, and constitutional obligations.

1. Preventive Role of Police

Police act before the forced marriage occurs, primarily through:

(a) Risk identification and intelligence gathering

• Monitoring vulnerable groups (minors, runaways, victims of trafficking).
• Acting on complaints from families, NGOs, schools, or helplines.
• Surveillance of known trafficking or coercion networks.

(b) Intervention on complaints

• Registering FIRs immediately under relevant penal provisions (kidnapping, abduction, criminal intimidation, trafficking).
• Conducting preventive raids and rescue operations.

(c) Preventive legal action

• Using preventive powers under criminal procedure laws to restrain accused persons.
• Coordinating with magistrates for restraining orders or protection directions.

📌 Example principle: Police are not passive record-keepers; they are duty-bound to prevent cognizable offences where credible information exists.

2. Protective Role of Police

Once a threat is identified, police ensure:

(a) Protection of the victim

• Safe custody and shelter home placement.
• Escorting victims to courts, hospitals, or safe houses.

(b) Protection from family or community pressure

• Preventing “honour-based coercion.”
• Ensuring victims are not returned to coercive environments.

(c) Confidential handling of complaints

• Protecting identity in sensitive cases.
• Ensuring victim safety during investigation.

3. Rescue Role in Forced Marriage Cases

Police have a direct operational role:

• Conducting raids and rescuing victims from forced marriage ceremonies.
• Coordinating with child protection units in cases involving minors.
• Acting on information from NGOs or helplines.

📌 Example (from practice): In multiple reported cases across South Asia, police have intercepted weddings where the victim was brought under false pretenses or confinement, treating it as abduction/trafficking.

4. Investigative Role of Police

After intervention, police must:

(a) Register appropriate offences

Common charges include:

• Kidnapping/abduction
• Criminal intimidation
• Wrongful confinement
• Human trafficking
• Offences relating to child marriage

(b) Collect evidence

• Statements of victims under legal protection
• Medical examination (if relevant)
• Electronic evidence (calls, messages, travel records)

(c) Identify wider networks

• Trafficking syndicates
• Complicit family members or intermediaries

5. Judicially Recognised Role of Police (Case Laws)

Below are important case laws illustrating police duties in preventing coercion, protecting personal liberty, and handling forced marriage-related situations:

1. Lata Singh v. State of U.P. (2006)

Principle: Protection of adult choice in marriage

• The Supreme Court directed police to protect couples facing threats due to inter-caste or inter-faith marriage.
• Police were instructed not to harass couples in consensual relationships.

📌 Relevance:
Police must distinguish consensual marriage from forced marriage pressure, and ensure protection from violence by family or society.

2. Bhagwan Dass v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2011)

Principle: Honour-based violence must be strictly prevented

• The Court condemned honour killings and emphasized strict police action.
• Failure of police to act against family coercion was criticized.

📌 Relevance:
Police are obligated to act swiftly where coercion may lead to forced marriage or violence.

3. Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M. (2018) (Hadiya Case)

Principle: Autonomy in marriage is fundamental

• The Supreme Court restored the marriage of an adult woman who had voluntarily married.
• Court emphasized individual liberty and choice.

📌 Relevance:
Police cannot intervene to enforce family preference; they must protect free consent.

4. Sampurna Behura v. Union of India (2018)

Principle: Child protection system must be functional

• The Court directed strengthening of child protection mechanisms.
• Police were recognized as key actors in preventing child exploitation and forced unions.

📌 Relevance:
Police must coordinate with child welfare systems in suspected child forced marriage cases.

5. Independent Thought v. Union of India (2017)

Principle: Child marriage constitutes serious harm

• The Court read down marital rape exception for minors aged 15–18.
• It reinforced protection of minors under 18 from forced marital relations.

📌 Relevance:
Police must treat child marriage-linked forced marriage cases as serious offences and act proactively.

6. Pradeep Kumar v. State of Bihar (2017, various High Court rulings on kidnapping-for-marriage cases)

Principle: Marriage does not justify abduction

• Courts held that taking a woman/child without free consent cannot be justified as marriage.
• Police must register kidnapping/abduction cases even if marriage is claimed.

📌 Relevance:
Police cannot treat forced marriage as a “private family matter” if coercion is present.

6. Institutional Role (Legal Framework Context)

Police act under multiple legal instruments, including:

• Criminal law provisions on kidnapping, abduction, and intimidation
• Child protection laws (for minors)
• Anti-trafficking laws
• Special protection orders against forced marriage (in some jurisdictions)

They also coordinate with:

• Courts (for protection orders)
• NGOs (for rescue and rehabilitation)
• Social welfare departments

7. Challenges Faced by Police

• Family pressure and social resistance
• Underreporting due to fear or stigma
• Lack of victim cooperation in early stages
• Cross-border trafficking in forced marriage cases
• Cultural normalization of coercive marriage practices in some areas

Conclusion

The police play a multi-dimensional role in preventing forced marriages: they act as preventers, rescuers, investigators, and protectors of individual autonomy. Judicial decisions consistently reinforce that police must prioritize consent, liberty, and protection of vulnerable persons, rather than treating marriage disputes as purely private or cultural matters.