‘Respect of family gets tarnished’: Gujarat court orders probe into ‘role’ of live-in partner

The order stated, “The deceased of the present case was a young girl aged about 18 years and the complainant, who is aged about 23 years and is a married man, had eloped with her and executed a mutual friendship (live-in) agreement. In the environment and society from which the complainant and the deceased belong, such acts are not acceptable and the complainant knew the mentality and customs of his society very well and he also knew that when a young daughter of a family runs away with a married man and lives in a ‘live-in relationship’, then the respect of the family gets tarnished in the society. With the environment and mentality with which the people of the family live, (they) can commit such a serious act, yet he did so and the act committed by the complainant resulted in the killing.”

Additional Sessions Judge P M Sayani added, “It appears from the record that the complainant was very well aware about the fact that the act committed by him is not acceptable to the society or family of the deceased. The complainant, despite very well knowing the mentality and customs of his society, had committed such a serious act, which resulted in the honour killing.”

The court stated that a case of abetment of murder and culpable homicide could be made out against the complainant, Haresh Chaudhary.

The order stated, “Hence, the offence punishable under Section 46 of the BNS may be made out against the applicant and he may be considered as abettor of the present crime. From the perusal of the complaint and record available on record, the complainant of the present case can be considered as an accused who committed the offence regarding culpable homicide which describes in Section 100 of the BNS and the act done by the complainant may be considered as the offence punishable under Section 101(d) of the BNS. Therefore, the Investigating Officer should conduct the investigation keeping this aspect in mind and submit a detailed report in the context of the investigation.”

Giving further directions to the police, the order stated, “Hence, the I.O./P.I., Tharad Police Station, is directed to take appropriate action keeping in mind the facts mentioned in the complaint… and submit the report of the action to this court on or before December 1, 2025. The situation should come to the knowledge of the SP, Vav-Tharad District, hence a copy of this order (should) also be sent to the SP Vav-Tharad District.”

Granting bail to Naranpura Sava Patel on a bond of Rs 50,000, the order stated, “I have considered the nature and gravity of the present case, role attributed to the present applicant. Considering the fact that the role of applicant is not directly committing the murder of the deceased, his role is lesser than the main accused persons who had committed the murder. The applicant has been in custody since August 9, 2025 and the trial of the case may take some more time. So this court is of the opinion that the present applicant should be released on regular bail on appropriate conditions and in the interest of justice…”

The case

An FIR filed on August 6, 2025, by Haresh alleged that Chandrika’s family had murdered her. Haresh said after he took Chandrika for her NEET exam, she stayed with relatives and later returned to Danitya, her village. Despite her wish to study nursing, her parents allegedly refused. Fearing for her life, Chandrika asked Haresh to “elope with her”. They signed a live-in contract at Mirzapur Court on June 5 and travelled to Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan. On June 12, Tharad Police brought them back and a court sent her with her family. Haresh was later arrested and jailed until June 21. During this time, Chandrika reportedly sent messages to him saying her family was planning to “kill her”. After his release, Haresh’s lawyer filed a habeas corpus plea, but Chandrika was found dead and cremated before the June 27 hearing. A police probe revealed she was allegedly drugged and strangled to death allegedly by the family members, including her father Sendha. Her father, Sendha, and relatives Shivram and Naran Sava Patel were arrested under BNS Sections 103(1) (murder) , 123, 238, and 54 later.