top of page

She asked the state to protect her. She was sent home. She never came back

She asked the state to protect her. She was sent home. She never came back
She asked the state to protect her. She was sent home. She never came back

Published on 27 May 2026 at 04:59 GMT

By Kiran Rana

 


I keep returning to one question: what happens when a woman asks the state to save her life, and the state sends her back to the people she fears most?

 

Gullan Bharo, a young woman from Sindh, Pakistan, reportedly left her home at night in an attempt to save herself from violence. She reached a police station and told officers that her husband had abused her and threatened her. She asked for protection.

 

The police registered the case, and she was later presented before a court. The court reportedly decided that she should be sent to Darul Aman, a state shelter intended to protect women at risk. On paper, this may have appeared to be a protective measure. In reality, the most important questions were still left unanswered.

 

Who would guarantee her safety? Who would prevent pressure from her family? Who would protect her from those who had already made her life unsafe?

 

As she was passing through the court corridor, her father arrived and pleaded with her to return home. According to several accounts, he placed his turban at her feet, using his own humiliation as emotional pressure over his daughter’s survival. He asked her to come back and save the family’s honour.

 

This is where the case becomes even more painful. Why is men’s honour so often linked to women’s choices, movements and lives? Why must a woman’s safety be negotiated through family pressure, shame and public emotion, instead of being protected through law, justice and institutions?

 

Seeing her father’s condition, Gullan Bharo reportedly said on camera that she knew she would be killed, but that there was no other path. Her father signed a guarantee document and took her home.

 

Days later, she was killed in what has been described as a so-called “honour” killing. Police later arrested several suspects, including close family members, while reports also named another suspect who remained wanted by the authorities.

 

But the central question remains: when a woman walks to a police station, tells officers that she has been abused and threatened, and clearly asks the state to protect her life, why is she returned to the same environment she fears?

 

Where is honour when a living human being is killed? How many women like Gullan Bharo must be lost before protection systems respond with urgency, seriousness and independence?

 

For me, this was not only a case of so-called honour killing. It was also a collapse of protection, policing and justice. Gullan Bharo asked the state to save her life. The state returned her to the people she feared most.

 

The case connects directly with Sustainable Development Goal 16, Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions. This goal calls for access to justice, accountable institutions and protection from violence. But Gullan Bharo’s case shows that legal procedures alone are not enough. A woman at risk cannot be protected by a family guarantee if the family itself is part of the pressure, fear or danger surrounding her.

 

This is why the response of civil society matters. Women’s Action Forum, a long-standing women’s rights organisation in Pakistan, publicly condemned the institutional failure surrounding Gullan Bharo’s death and highlighted the urgent need for stronger protection mechanisms for women facing violence and coercion.

 

Its response shows that this case is not only about one family or one court decision. It is about a wider system in which women who ask for help can still be left alone once they enter the justice process. Protection must not end at the police station door. It must continue through the courts, shelters, social services and every institution responsible for keeping vulnerable people safe.

 

Gullan Bharo’s story is therefore not only the story of one woman. It is a warning about what happens when protection depends on family guarantees, social pressure and fragile institutions rather than on the clear duty of the state to protect those whose lives are at risk.

 

Further information:

bottom of page