12 points by MahaPanchayat - How much you agree?

[ravichaudhary]

http://www.ndtv.com/news/videos/video_player.php?id=1226277

In debate above, I liked the way Madhu Kishwar has put in the subject in context with law / belief / traditions!!

I wish Dr. O.P. Dhankhar would have exploited the opportunity in one of the other debates to let people (millions of people across India) know what Khap Panchayat / Sarv Khap Panchayat are; how are these different from legal Panchayats and what was / is their context in rural society particulary in northern states where these forms are present (i.e. in Jat dominated areas).

Madhu Kishwar was absolutely excellent. So was Naveen and also Barkah Dutt

Madhu articulated the points being made by the Jats very well. So did Naveen Jindal.

Respect traditions, also abhor violence

Good Video, should be uploaded.
Ravi Chaudhary

 

[kusumdhochak]

It is not very clear to me what changes in the Act are people asking for.
Also, There is special marriage act which is applicable for say couples having inter religion/community marriages. These Jat couples can always say that they don't want to marry under HMA. They don't really care under what law they get married. Moreover no one can force them to say leave their Gotra etc as their is freedom to choose religion/name etc. And so law will not not allow their ostracization from society. So I can't see how it is going to help anyone.

Also I personally don't support ostracization. If someone doesn't like their act, they are free to choose not to have any interaction with them but no one should force it or put fines on people who want to keep relations with that family.

 

[ravichaudhary]

It is not very clear to me what changes in the Act are people asking for.
Also, There is special marriage act which is applicable for say couples having inter religion/community marriages. These Jat couples can always say that they don't want to marry under HMA. They don't really care under what law they get married. Moreover no one can force them to say leave their Gotra etc as their is freedom to choose religion/name etc. And so law will not not allow their ostracization from society. So I can't see how it is going to help anyone.

Also I personally don't support ostracization. If someone doesn't like their act, they are free to choose not to have any interaction with them but no one should force it or put fines on people who want to keep relations with that family.

Valid points

Could we hear from more Jat ladies?

Ravi Chaudhary

 

[virj]

Also, There is special marriage act which is applicable for say couples having inter religion/community marriages. These Jat couples can always say that they don't want to marry under HMA. They don't really care under what law they get married.

I think, After amendment in HMA they wont be able to marry under special marriage act unless a provision is added for them.

 

[virj]

77 per cent oppose same gotra marriages and 63% favour amendment to HMA: HT survey

View attachment 10021

Even as the government proposes tougher laws against honour killings sanctioned by khap panchayats, a survey carried out by Hindustan Times in Haryana shows most people are against same gotra (sub-caste) marriages.
The survey shows as many as 77 per cent of the respondents do not support same gotra marriages. The survey was carried out in Chandigarh, Rohtak, Jind, Bhiwani and Kurukshetra. Surprisingly, even in Chandigarh, 65 per cent of the respondents have opposed same gotra marriages.
Thirty four per cent of the respondents have said that khap panchayats have the right to order the social boycott of a couple if it violates same gotra marriage rules.
The issue of khap panchayats and honour killings related to same-gotra marriage has taken political turn with Congress MP from Kurukshetra Naveen Jindal and the INLD's Om Prakash Chautala both speaking in favour of the demand of khap panchayats for a change in marriage laws.
The panchayats want to outlaw same gotra marriages.


Nothing too dramatic but I was wondering who these rest 23% are: Muslims, Pundits ,Haryjans or Neo-liberals(As Media house call them). Any idea Kirti and undy TV?????????


P.S. The Poll was conducted from a genaral sample of people(there is no reference that it was Jat exclusive) which may or may not include Muslims, Harijan etc who dont follow Gotra system. Moreover people were from cities only.

 

[singhvp]

Let us not suspect each other's caste credentials.

I think it is high time we should stop making unchaste remarks about those who have expressed themselves candidly on this subject without blindly falling in line with those who support the honour killing and the amendment in the marriage act etc. I acknowledge that some of the boys who are found to be indulging in this kind of behaviour could be more educated, professionally better-placed, financially sound, having bigger social status, profound and better knowledge of the history, origin and traditions of the community. Also physically, some of them may be more good-looking and charming than others. I dare not to deny these facts. But, I seriously doubt that the kind of behaviour, they indulge in, is going to enhance their prestige and status to which they are otherwise entitled to. This is also going to tell upon the health of this, otherwise healthy web-site (JL), and will also potentially tarnish its image which has been built upon by the stewards after painstaking efforts. If you are hell-bent to scare away the people having differing opinion, whom you have been branding with many adjectives like Muslims, Pundits, Nakli Jats, Harijan etc. Etc., you may continue to do so. There may be, perhaps, no provision of punitive measure on the site for such activities for certain category of privileged persons. But this disguised tirade of yours is against the fundamental right to expression. Therefore let us stop this trend as it will only give rise to the negative tendency of suspecting each other’s caste credentials and might eventually prompt us to insist on a DNA Test for establishing our biological parentage which might prove to be very embarrassing for some of us who seem to be challenging others caste tag. If you are living in glass house do not ever try to throw stones at others. We all are nude in a "Hamam". Let us not stoop to the level of pointing finger to the chastity of our mothers because all the mothers have passed though the same phase, in the same boat.

 

[sanjaymalik]

I think, After amendment in HMA they wont be able to marry under special marriage act unless a provision is added for them.

Vipin u r right,but You have inter mixed both these Acts in your earlier post, one section you have had mentioned of HMA and the other is of SMA. Both have different procedure.

 

[virj]

Bharti JI, Could you please Amend

Vipin u r right,but You have inter mixed both these Acts in your earlier post, one section you have had mentioned of HMA and the other is of SMA. Both have different procedure.

Thanks Sanjay Bhai. Yes I saw the mistake. I will request Bharti ji to fix it. Cant edit my post now. If you see any other mistake please let me know.

this need to be replaced

HMA, section 2(b) of the Special Marriage Act prohibited martial relationships in half or uterine blood as well as full blood, illegitimate and legitimate blood and by adoption.
The full blood and half blood means two persons said to be related to each other by full blood when they are descended from a common ancestor by the same wife and by half blood, when descended from a common ancestor but by different wives. By uterine blood, it means two persons said to be related to each other by uterine blood when they are descended from a common ancestress but by different husbands


By

Conditions for a Hindu marriage
A marriage may be solemnized between any two Hindus, if the following condition are fulfilled, namely:-
(i) neither party has a spouse living at the time of the marriage
1[(ii) at the time of marriage, neither party-
(a) is incapable of giving a valid consent to it in consequence of unsoundness of mind; or
(b) though capable of giving a valid consent, has been suffering from mental disorder of such a kind or to such an extent as to be unfit for marriage and the procreation of children; or
(c ) has been subject to recurrent attacks of insanity2 [***]
(iii) the bridegroom has completed the age of 3[twenty one years] and the bride, the age of 4[eighteen years] at the time of marriage
(iv) the parties are not within the degrees of prohibited relationship, unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two;
(v) the parties are not sapindas of each other, unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two; 5[***].


(g) “degrees of prohibited relationship” - two persons are said to be within the “degrees of prohibited relationship” -
(i) if one is lineal ascendant of the other; or
(ii) if one was the wife or husband of a lineal ascendant or descendant of the other; or
(iii) if one was the wife of the brother or of the father’s or mother's brother or of the grandfather’s or grandmother’s brother of the other; or
(iv) if the two are brother and sister, uncle and niece, aunt and nephew or children of brother and sister or of two brother or of two sister;
Explanation- For the purposes of clauses (f) and (g), relationship includes:-
(i) relationship by half or uterine blood as well as by full blood;
(ii) illegitimate blood relationship as well as legitimate ;
(iii) relationship by adoption as well as by blood ;

 

[luccky]

kisne agree kiya hai inn points par???? just 1 or 2 points are ok rest doesnt make sense, How can u favor killers ??

 

[vijay]

Thanks for posting it Vipin

(g) “degrees of prohibited relationship” - two persons are said to be within the “degrees of prohibited relationship” -
(i) if one is lineal ascendant of the other; or
(ii) if one was the wife or husband of a lineal ascendant or descendant of the other; or
(iii) if one was the wife of the brother or of the father’s or mother's brother or of the grandfather’s or grandmother’s brother of the other; or
(iv) if the two are brother and sister, uncle and niece, aunt and nephew or children of brother and sister or of two brother or of two sister;
Explanation- For the purposes of clauses (f) and (g), relationship includes:-
(i) relationship by half or uterine blood as well as by full blood;
(ii) illegitimate blood relationship as well as legitimate ;
(iii) relationship by adoption as well as by blood ;

I think that law is very clear about the prohibited relationships. This simply doesn't allow the cousins to invole in marriage relationships. I wonder what amendment people want here.

Do they want to include the terms like Bhaichaara, padosi gaon etc in the HMA ?

 

[arvindc]

Is this “Khap debate” demaging Jat's 'cumunity' reputation?

While I agree to some of the points raised and do see them reasonable, I do not endorse the demand of enforcing these through a legislation. The core of these points stems out of the social and moral values, which I believe should be practiced and cultured by choice, through education, rather then by force.

Ironically, this khap episode, is being misinterpreted by few writers like Nandita Sengupta, and their ire is putting the whole Jat community in bad light. Her article “Progress an invader,control lies in fear” published in today’s ‘Times Of India’ is damaging for the entire Jat community.

Her comments, particularly the one “Being part of a mainstream casteagnostic India can pay far greater dividends than extolling Jat virtues. With Dalits progressing, education of girls who escaped being killed as a foetus, infant or teenager, private enterprise growing, and khaps no longer the power-centre for everyday living, khaps target those for whom Jat identity is second fiddle to individual identity.” should be responded by bringing out the real, brave and commendable Jat culture. Least it starts creating a false impression of the community.

I know Jat are really hated and feared by few business communities which have “bahar se titali aur ander se madhumakhi”(1) culture. Jats who flourish a culture that is just the opposite of their own becomes a natural enemy to them. In this scenario, it becomes our moral duty to register our opposition, with the writer and the news paper editors, in a polite way. We should defend our heritage and values through comments and articles, not just in Jatland but spread out over the internet sites.


PS: It would be really nice if can put a crisp and concise summary of the Jat’s community on Jatland. It can act as a reference point for comments/articles put elsewhere on the internet.

(1): Quoted lines from Premchand’s ‘Godan’.

 

[virj]

I think that law is very clear about the prohibited relationships. This simply doesn't allow the cousins to invole in marriage relationships. I wonder what amendment people want here.

Do they want to include the terms like Bhaichaara, padosi gaon etc in the HMA.

No Vijay they want Same Gotra thing (gotra of father & mother) to be included in the act as this is widely practised 'custom' of many north indians. Some people want this to be extended to inter-village marriage as well but thats bit complex. After amendment marriage between Same Gorta would be null and Void.

 

[luccky]

1-2 point is ok rest are bullshit !

 

[vijay]

No Vijay they want Same Gotra thing (gotra of father & mother) to be included in the act as this is widely practised 'custom' of many north indians. Some people want this to be extended to inter-village marriage as well but thats bit complex. After amendment marriage between Same Gorta would be null and Void.

I know that Vipin and that's why i am asking this question.

Kadyan and Kadian maybe two different gotras as per law. Same with malik and mallik .... the list is endless reagrding jat gotras. Some people advocate Bhaichaara among few gotras ( and that also vary from person to person ... region to region ) and Bhaichaara among villages.

They consider villages as brothers ( i wonder if village have brother sister relashionship too ) ... then certainly there must villages who are father and son, cousins etc and don't know what else are their demands.

Do these so called leaders of Khaps have any blue print about their specfic amendment points or they just shouting aloud to get more and more attention ?

 

[rakeshsehrawat]

Thanks Sanjay Bhai. Yes I saw the mistake. I will request Bharti ji to fix it. Cant edit my post now. If you see any other mistake please let me know.

this need to be replaced

HMA, section 2(b) of the Special Marriage Act prohibited martial relationships in half or uterine blood as well as full blood, illegitimate and legitimate blood and by adoption.
The full blood and half blood means two persons said to be related to each other by full blood when they are descended from a common ancestor by the same wife and by half blood, when descended from a common ancestor but by different wives. By uterine blood, it means two persons said to be related to each other by uterine blood when they are descended from a common ancestress but by different husbands


By

Conditions for a Hindu marriage
A marriage may be solemnized between any two Hindus, if the following condition are fulfilled, namely:-
(i) neither party has a spouse living at the time of the marriage
1[(ii) at the time of marriage, neither party-
(a) is incapable of giving a valid consent to it in consequence of unsoundness of mind; or
(b) though capable of giving a valid consent, has been suffering from mental disorder of such a kind or to such an extent as to be unfit for marriage and the procreation of children; or
(c ) has been subject to recurrent attacks of insanity2 [***]
(iii) the bridegroom has completed the age of 3[twenty one years] and the bride, the age of 4[eighteen years] at the time of marriage
(iv) the parties are not within the degrees of prohibited relationship, unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two;
(v) the parties are not sapindas of each other, unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two; 5[***].


(g) “degrees of prohibited relationship” - two persons are said to be within the “degrees of prohibited relationship” -
(i) if one is lineal ascendant of the other; or
(ii) if one was the wife or husband of a lineal ascendant or descendant of the other; or
(iii) if one was the wife of the brother or of the father’s or mother's brother or of the grandfather’s or grandmother’s brother of the other; or
(iv) if the two are brother and sister, uncle and niece, aunt and nephew or children of brother and sister or of two brother or of two sister;
Explanation- For the purposes of clauses (f) and (g), relationship includes:-
(i) relationship by half or uterine blood as well as by full blood;
(ii) illegitimate blood relationship as well as legitimate ;
(iii) relationship by adoption as well as by blood ;

But there are exceptions also like for south India they can marry their cousins
We also want that changes should be made as per our traditions why not gotra and village clause included if it is case of Haryana Resident

 

[kusumdhochak]

Special Marriage Act is applicable to anyone in India and allows marriages the boy and girl are not genetically related upto certain degree which is agreeable to most people (Although it allows marriages to first cousins in some cases where the social customs allow it). A law can give exemptions but it can not put restrictions which can not be logically/scientifically justified. So I don't think it is right to demand changes which are restricting in SMA based on culture because this act is specially designed keeping into mind the basic human rights. People can ask amendments in HMA and it won't be that difficult to change it.

Regarding comparision to allowing marriages to first cousins for some communities/areas, it only gives them an option and does not force it on anyone. For example some day if Jats in Haryana question the governmet why they are not allowed to marry first cousins while others are, the government might have to either give them also the exemption or put restriction on all on scientific basis.

 

[virj]

I know that Vipin and that's why i am asking this question.

Kadyan and Kadian maybe two different gotras as per law. Same with malik and mallik .... the list is endless reagrding jat gotras. Some people advocate Bhaichaara among few gotras ( and that also vary from person to person ... region to region ) and Bhaichaara among villages.

They consider villages as brothers ( i wonder if village have brother sister relashionship too ) ... then certainly there must villages who are father and son, cousins etc and don't know what else are their demands.

Do these so called leaders of Khaps have any blue print about their specfic amendment points or they just shouting aloud to get more and more attention ?

Vijay again I am no law expert and would request Sanjay ( and other from legal to correct me). But as Rakesh mentioned in the law there are certain "customs" that can by pass the law. Like in south in some clans a marriage between cousins and if I am not wrong between a mama and a batiji is legal. Through its clearly prohibited for other hindus.

Now once law recongnise our custom than the onus would be on the person who challenge that marriage to prove that its against the widely accepted "custom". If court found otherwise than the marriage would still be legal. Like you said "Kadyan and Kadian maybe two different gotras as per law" than court would look at the realities, the customs and will act accordingly. The "wedded couple can prove this in the court and can easily win. The law will itself mature with time once there will be few cases in the court and if needed would be amended again accordingly.

 

[virj]

Special Marriage Act is applicable to anyone in India and allows marriages the boy and girl are not genetically related upto certain degree which is agreeable to most people (Although it allows marriages to first cousins in some cases where the social customs allow it). A law can give exemptions but it can not put restrictions which can not be logically/scientifically justified. So I don't think it is right to demand changes which are restricting in SMA based on culture because this act is specially designed keeping into mind the basic human rights. People can ask amendments in HMA and it won't be that difficult to change it.

Regarding comparision to allowing marriages to first cousins for some communities/areas, it only gives them an option and does not force it on anyone. For example some day if Jats in Haryana question the governmet why they are not allowed to marry first cousins while others are, the government might have to either give them also the exemption or put restriction on all on scientific basis.

Special Marriage Act, 1954.

(2) It extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and applies also to citizens of India domiciled in the territories to which this Act extends who are outsider the said territories.



4. Conditions relating to solemnization of special marriages. - Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force relating to the solemnization of marriages, a marriage between any two persons may be solemnized under this Act, if at the time of the marriage the following conditions are fulfilled


And for ur last point : Obviously people wanting to get married in same gotras will get exemption/provision

 

[kapdal]

A law can give exemptions but it can not put restrictions which can not be logically/scientifically justified.

I am glad you made this point. It is a very fine point and needs to be understood. Exemptions under law and restrictions under law are very different things.

Many people here are demading a provision to restrict marriages based on gotra in Hindu Marriages Act because some South Indian communities' customs were granted an exemption. I believe the exact exemption is this "(v) the parties are not sapindas of each other, unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two; "

So cousins can't marry unless both of them belong to a community(or communities) that have this custom. Now imagine what if the provision was not put in there. Then some communities would have found their customs deemed as illegal under the Act. Is this the situation with us? Does the law restrict us from practising our customs? Does it say that the custom of leaving gotras is prohibited under the Hindu Marriage Act? No, it does not! We are free to practise our customs, just like all other communities are.

A personal law for a diverse religion like Hinduism with thousands of communities can't define rules for each custom of every community. It just needs to ensure that it is not restricting any community from practising its customs. This is what the above exception is doing.

The Hindu Marriage Act can't be amended such that our customs become a law for all other communities. The demands being made here can only be incorporated in the law by either having a Jat Marriage Act or amending Hindu Marriage Act by adding a specific clause for Jats that details our customs. It is doable as Indian politicians are good at appeasing communities by throwing such crumbs at them (remember Shah Bano, Satanic Verses, etc?). The leading lights of the community are free to give it a shot. But I don't think we have some special status that our customs need to be enshrined in the law. And there are hundreds of other things to worry about, this surely can't be our focus as the whole world marches ahead.

 

[rakeshsehrawat]

12 panne 238 replies and still people ask what ammendement these fools want