"Should the Govt amend HMA to ban 'same-gotra' marriage"?

Do you support same Gotra marriage?


  • Total voters
    166
continue..

नारद के अनुसार तो सगोत्र विवाह करने वाले पुरुष के लिए शिश्न-उत्कर्णन के अतिरिक्त कोई दंड नहीं है [नारद स्मृति 15.73-75]।
धर्मसूत्रों में कई निर्देश हैं। जैसे, आपस्तंब धर्मसूत्र [2.11.15], विष्णु धर्मसूत्र [24.9-10], वशिष्ठ धर्मसूत्र [8.1], बौधायन धर्मसूत्र [2.1.38] तथा गौतम धर्मसूत्र [4.2, 23.12] में इसका स्पष्ट निर्देश है। स्मृतियों में सगोत्र विवाह के विरुद्ध और अधिक कठोर व्यवस्था दी गई है। उदाहरण के लिए, नारद स्मृति [12.7, 15.73-75], मनुस्मृति [3.5], विष्णु स्मृति [24.9], पराशर स्मृति [10.13-14], आदि।
कुछ स्मृतियों में सगोत्र विवाह की संतान को चाडाल कहा गया है। अधिक जानने के लिए पुरुषोत्तम पंडित लिखित 12वीं सदी से पहले की रचना गोत्र प्रवरनिबंधकदम्बम् पढ़ सकते हैं। असगोत्र विवाह की प्रथा भारत में ई.पू. 8वीं शती से चल रही है। आज भी भारत में विवाह में गोत्र प्रतिबंध का पूरा पालन होता है। कई स्थानों पर गोत्रविषयक लौकिक प्रतिबंध शास्त्रीय मर्यादाओं की अपेक्षा अधिक कड़े हैं। कई विदेशी विद्वानों ने भी इसका आकलन किया है। इसलिए हरियाणा की खाप जो कर रही है, वह शास्त्रीय दृष्टि से अनुचित नहीं। चाहे विदेशी विचारों के प्रभाव में उसे कितना ही निंदित क्यों न किया जाए।

Good article but some thinks otherwise. They think the khap's demand is against the humanity, liberty, personal freedom or whatever.

Even our Judges thinks same. In this country if you are minority than you enjoy special treatment, seperate law, reservation etc. Its the only country in the world where minority are better treated and enjoy special rights.


यह परंपरा एक गांव के व्यक्तियों में विवाह अनुचित समझती है, क्योंकि उन्हें प्राय: एक परिवार का संबंधी सा समझा जाता है। गांव के लड़के-लड़कियां आपस में भाई-बहन और बुजुर्ग लोग उनके चाचा-चाची, दादा-दादी आदि जैसे समझे जाते हैं। नजदीकी संबंधियों की भांति एक गांव वालों में विवाह वर्जित रहा है। इसका शास्त्रीय संकेत यह है कि वैदिक युग से ही वधू को विवाह के बाद अपने ससुराल में आसानी से पहुंचने, मार्ग में कोई कष्ट न होने की अनेक प्रार्थनाएं हैं [ऋग्वेद, 10.85.23, तथा अनेक अन्य संदर्भ]। सारे लोकगीत विवाह के बाद लड़की के विदा होकर दूर चले जाने के संदर्भ से भरे हुए हैं। कहीं स्थानीय विवाह का संकेत तक नहीं मिलता। इसकी अनदेखी करना जानबूझ कर भारतीय परंपरा का तिरस्कार करना है।
अत: हिंदू ग्रंथों का संदर्भ ढूंढ़ने से पहले यह समझना चाहिए कि हिंदू धर्म में विवाह कोई निजी मामला नहीं अपितु एक सामाजिक-धार्मिक कार्य है। यह उन सोलह संस्कारों में एक है जो प्रत्येक हिंदू के लिए निर्धारित है। अत: खापों पर बिगड़ने से पहले उनकी भावना को हिंदू दृष्टि से देखें। ईसाई, व्यक्तिवादी, फिल्मी या मात्र कानूनी दृष्टि से देखकर खापों के विरुद्ध होना उचित नहीं माना जा सकता।



Well man, for most people: If you speak fluent english, you are modern and advanced not to mention more intelligent as well. The better u speak the more u are. Even in army(higher ranks) if you are poor in english u cant get in???????!!!!!!!!. Even in civil services interviews ur english is tested. OK english is now an international language and an added advantage if u have to work in foreign land and here in MNCs. But its just a language and doesnt tell ur IQ level or ur competancy. The more western outfit u wear the more Modern and advanced. If u eat with knief and forks same. If u celebrate christmas and go to church on 26th its also considered as a sign of being modern and advance by many people. :D

The base of our law was colonial. We follow westminister system because the colonial masters followed it.
 
Last edited:
The Law Ministry swung into action after Union Home Minister P Chidambaram wrote to Union Law Minister M Veerappa Moily expressing a sense of urgency for a new law to make the punishment for honour killing extremely stringent.

Under the new law, the accused will have to prove their innocence as against ordinary criminal cases where the state has to prove the guilt of the accused.

For all the comments made on this, I want to know the veracity of the statement made. Does this site quoted here even have the (abysmal) credibility of other Indian papers? I did a google for Veerapa Moily and didn't see the above statement anywhere else.

Just prima-facie, this is an absolutely unbelievable statement. There is no distinction between ordinary and extra-ordinary criminal cases world over as far as how the guilt has to be proved. In a criminal case, there is presumption of innoncence until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Even terrorists like Kasab were tried under the same "rule of law". Let's not believe anything from any crappy source. Of course, if it is true, if anyone said anything like this, he can be taken head on.
 

Bhai mere, tu kyun emotional ho gaya. I doubted the person(s) reporting these "facts" and not the person posting the link here...:).

Yeh saare link koi bahut reputed sites se nahin hain. Apart from Deccan Chronicle, others are not even newspapers but just websites, who usually copy paste reports without discretion.

TOI, HT, Indian express, NDTV- all have the same news (SMA provision, making Khap members accomplice, etc.) but not this bit about "onus on the accused to prove innocence". Moily ne alag alag interview to diye nahin honge. And it is such a juicy and provocative statement that all the media should jump at it. So why would others give it a miss?

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/dishonour-killings-centre-promises-tough-law-34423
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/stricter-law-against-honour-killing-moily/639250/
http://www.hindustantimes.com/New-b...ers-as-accomplices-Moily/Article1-564043.aspx
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...honour-killings-Moily/articleshow/6099192.cms

Anyways, my objection is not solely on who reported it. That I said only because it is such an unbelievably foolish statement that I don't expect even a fool to make. But assuming for a second that Moily had actually said it, it won't have made sense given that "presumption of innoncence until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt."is a fundamental principle in criminal justice system. So he could be blasted if he actually said it and if such a law is attempted, it should face legal challenges. Some basic info. on this principle is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence

If you still don't trust my logic, please consult someone with a legal background (that I don't have).
 
Last edited:
Emotional ?! I know u didnt question me but u questioned the link and hence I pasted more link to show its not just that site but the news was actually from agencies. Ur agrument' presumption of innoncence until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt is a common knowledge. I was just thinking about the highlighted text in blue and red. I just said thats its reported by IANS and UTI from whom TOI and other newspapers buy news as well.

In ur pasted NDTV link it says :

"We propose to introduce a fifth clause for the Section 300, which is the murder clause. We are also amending the Indian Evidence Act to put the onus on all the persons who have taken the decision (to perpetrate an honour killing) and those who are responsible for the murder of the couple. Thirdly, we propose an amendment of the Special Marriage Act," said M Veerappa Moily, Indian Federal Law Minister


Can you or any law person interpret this line. What u think he means by this line in the proposed amendment.
 
Emotional ?! I know u didnt question me but u questioned the link and hence I pasted more link to show its not just that site but the news was actually from agencies. Ur agrument' presumption of innoncence until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt is a common knowledge. I was just thinking about the highlighted text in blue and red. I just said thats its reported by IANS and UTI from whom TOI and other newspapers buy news as well.

In ur pasted NDTV link it says :

"We propose to introduce a fifth clause for the Section 300, which is the murder clause. We are also amending the Indian Evidence Act to put the onus on all the persons who have taken the decision (to perpetrate an honour killing) and those who are responsible for the murder of the couple. Thirdly, we propose an amendment of the Special Marriage Act," said M Veerappa Moily, Indian Federal Law Minister


Can you or any law person interpret this line. What u think he means by this line in the proposed amendment.

1. Why I think this "news" is absolutely crappy? That it comes from news agencies doesn't increase its credibility to me. Why? Because in that case, there should have been only one version. As there was only one interview. All these sites and newspapers have used Moily's words in inverted commas- which means they are quoting him. Yet, the words (and even inference) is different everywhere. So if 10 guys report 10 different versions of what Moliy said, atleast 9 are wrong. There is 0 discretion, when you are quoting someone. You have to repeat the other person's words verbatim. This is journalism 101.

2. It is important to know what Moily really said and not what NDTV or someone else is saying. As they are all saying different things. Can someone contact someone in media to get to the bottom of this?

Nevertheless, the bolded line seems to refer to the other bit of news of making all Khap members accomplice in the crime. To put the onus means to put the responsibility, which seems to gel with "all the persons who have taken the decision". The relevant clause in Evidence Act is this:
http://www.vakilno1.com/bareacts/indianevidenceact/CHAPTER2/S10.html
So it suggests that all Khap members who are part of the decision making process, but who are not seen as pronouncing the decision, would be made accomplice by amending this clause.

3. However, onus also means burden. So it can be read as burden of proof, though I think it is a bit of a stretch. Probably that is the reason for different interpretations of what Moily said. But some further research showed me that there is already an anomaly to the "burden of proof" being on the prosecution- in case of Dowry laws; where the burden of proof lies on the accused. The relevant section of Evidence Act is:
http://www.vakilno1.com/bareacts/indianevidenceact/CHAPTER7/S113B.html
So on second thoughts, it is not as impossible as I thought it'd be. Evidence Act may be amended to include a similar clause on "honour killings". Still, considering both interpretations, I think it is much more likely that they are trying to bring a clause that makes all Khap members accomplices in the crime.

Whatever the interpreation, either move is absurd and illogical. It doesn't have merit and is pandering to the media hype.

In any case, this is the complete opposite of what the Khaps and other Jat organizations demanded, that is amendment of HMA. Are these Khaps and organizations so politically irrelevant that the govt. is ignoring their voice and actually planning to do the complete opposite? It is a question and not a claim!
 
Lot of people heard this on TV as well. I missed it so dont know what exactly he said. Also except one or two i cant see any inverted comma quote. Could you please highlight that particular line where u think there are 10 different version. There are two version one from UTI and other from IANS. both are more or less same but UTI highlighted this above line where as IANS omitted it. But if u can highlight where u see the difference in quotes then I can understand better.

The onus is yes 'burden' But as far as I remember in many civil and tort cases onus of evidence is put on the plaintiff. In criminal case its prosecution and they must prove the defendant's guilt "beyond the resonable doubt". There is special clause in dowry and rape cases where in some cases the burden of evidence can be shifted on the accused. It depends on the judges what they decide as its hard to prove what happened behind the closed door because the girl is alone and her parents or relatives are not there to prove many things. Lets not get into this here.

He was talking about Indian evidence act so there is no chance of any confusion.

But these cases are differnet. It has a much different social angle In murder and most other criminal cases the onus is on state but they are changing this(for honour killing) to put onus on accused to prove himself innocent. Moreover they will treat the whole khap as accused(I guess in case where there is a khap meet and a decision is taken against the marriage or whatever) but what would happen in the cases here there is no khap. As we have seen in most of the cases. All close relatives could become accused? And in some cases village panchayat can?

A murder is a murder and should be punished but after amendment would khaps give their opinion on gotra issues or any marriages? Moreover what would happen in such cases when such marriage bring a 'bad name' to whole family. Many familiy themself would boycott such couples. Many judges say even to put social pressure or social boycott is crime(which as per the english laws is technically or legally is right). So villagers who boycott such couple and they commit suicide or leave village than its also a crime.

Still in haryana and punjab most of cases are decided by panchayats and even state dont interfere in these. Like the incident which happened in hisar (suryanagar) the panchayats of jats and chudas met and decided to give 10 days to resolve the issue. The police "accepted" it. And it saved a lot of trouble.

This thing challenge the very structure of our village social life. The very said thing has a good and a bad mix. The killing part is bad part but rest of the part is good(at least for majority of us). Thats y i said the approach is wrong. There should be a different approach to tackle this. Both sides views and situation should be considered through a national debate and then we can decide what should be the best course.


People like Moiley and other in Govt has little idea what they are talking about. Moreover again here the govt is not looking at the root cause which lead to the killing. The whole process isnt wrong. As someone pasted above "हिंदू धर्म में विवाह कोई निजी मामला नहीं अपितु एक सामाजिक-धार्मिक कार्य है। यह उन सोलह संस्कारों में एक है जो प्रत्येक हिंदू के लिए निर्धारित है। " Such acts affects others as well. Like the very family of the couple(in same gotra or other cases) and a marriage in same village affects the whole village. I probably cant express in words what I mean but ---- May be other senior members (like Fateh ji, Ravi ji or other respected members) can explain better what I mean.
 
Last edited:

Yes, the law should be sensitive to local customs and practices, provided they do not violate fundamental human rights.

Khaps play an important role in the social justice. One has to see this in the backdrop of medieval era laws (even inexistent in areas) and corrupt justice system. Khpas, most of the time play a crucial third party in resolving cases out of courts, which otherwise would have taken ages.

By putting the onus on the khaps to prove innocent, the law ministry has ignored this important contribution of Khaps and the Jat's social practices. Every time such incidents happen, it would be the khaps leaders who would be tortured. In addition to that. the government would waste the taxpayers money in these litigations. The only ones who seem to benefit from this law are the advocates and corrupt people in the judicial system.
 
Lot of people heard this on TV as well. I missed it so dont know what exactly he said. Also except one or two i cant see any inverted comma quote. Could you please highlight that particular line where u think there are 10 different version. There are two version one from UTI and other from IANS. both are more or less same but UTI highlighted this above line where as IANS omitted it. But if u can highlight where u see the difference in quotes then I can understand better.

The onus is yes 'burden' But as far as I remember in many civil and tort cases onus of evidence is put on the plaintiff. In criminal case its prosecution and they must prove the defendant's guilt "beyond the resonable doubt". There is special clause in dowry and rape cases where in some cases the burden of evidence can be shifted on the accused. It depends on the judges what they decide as its hard to prove what happened behind the closed door because the girl is alone and her parents or relatives are not there to prove many things. Lets not get into this here.

He was talking about Indian evidence act so there is no chance of any confusion.

But these cases are differnet. It has a much different social angle In murder and most other criminal cases the onus is on state but they are changing this(for honour killing) to put onus on accused to prove himself innocent. Moreover they will treat the whole khap as accused(I guess in case where there is a khap meet and a decision is taken against the marriage or whatever) but what would happen in the cases here there is no khap. As we have seen in most of the cases. All close relatives could become accused? And in some cases village panchayat can?

A murder is a murder and should be punished but after amendment would khaps give their opinion on gotra issues or any marriages? Moreover what would happen in such cases when such marriage bring a 'bad name' to whole family. Many familiy themself would boycott such couples. Many judges say even to put social pressure or social boycott is crime(which as per the english laws is technically or legally is right). So villagers who boycott such couple and they commit suicide or leave village than its also a crime.

Still in haryana and punjab most of cases are decided by panchayats and even state dont interfere in these. Like the incident which happened in hisar (suryanagar) the panchayats of jats and chudas met and decided to give 10 days to resolve the issue. The police "accepted" it. And it saved a lot of trouble.

This thing challenge the very structure of our village social life. The very said thing has a good and a bad mix. The killing part is bad part but rest of the part is good(at least for majority of us). Thats y i said the approach is wrong. There should be a different approach to tackle this. Both sides views and situation should be considered through a national debate and then we can decide what should be the best course.


People like Moiley and other in Govt has little idea what they are talking about. Moreover again here the govt is not looking at the root cause which lead to the killing. The whole process isnt wrong. As someone pasted above "हिंदू धर्म में विवाह कोई निजी मामला नहीं अपितु एक सामाजिक-धार्मिक कार्य है। यह उन सोलह संस्कारों में एक है जो प्रत्येक हिंदू के लिए निर्धारित है। " Such acts affects others as well. Like the very family of the couple(in same gotra or other cases) and a marriage in same village affects the whole village. I probably cant express in words what I mean but ---- May be other senior members (like Fateh ji, Ravi ji or other respected members) can explain better what I mean.

vipin you are right but why are u so worry about this, even othewise the Govt amend Evidence Act and insert a clause regarding presumption of honour killing, then nothing will going to happen . Normally, the onus of prooving facts always lies upon the person who alleges that facts happened , it is the duty of the person who alleges to prove with cogent evidence beyound reasonable doubt. And in case of criminal law it's the duty of state or prosecution and onus of burden always lie on prosecution. this is clear intention of our criminal law.A person charged with any crime always presumed to be innocent and his chage shall be proved through proper trail, beyound reasoable doubt its burden is on state or prosecution.There are two kind of presumptions as per Indian Evidence Act-i) shall presumption or presumption of law ii ) may presumption or presumption of facts.Although both are rebutable. But in case of Shall presumption the onus of proof,not burden of proof, to prove his innocence lie on accused person to come with rebutable evidence, otherwise the court shall presume that yes such act has happened.For this the accused need stronge evidence to rebute the presumption of law.for e.g in rape cases as per section 114-A of IE Act if sexual intercouse proved and the rape victim state in her evidence that it was without her will or consent then, the court shall presume, there was no consent. So to rebut this the accused need to prove with stronge evidence that the victim was having will and consented party.As the same in case of section 113B of IE Act presumption of dowry death,these are presumption of law or shall presumption and in such case onus of proof shift from prosecution to accused person but onus of burden ,never shift, were inserted through subsequent Amendment.
 
Last edited:
Lot of people heard this on TV as well. I missed it so dont know what exactly he said. Also except one or two i cant see any inverted comma quote. Could you please highlight that particular line where u think there are 10 different version. There are two version one from UTI and other from IANS. both are more or less same but UTI highlighted this above line where as IANS omitted it. But if u can highlight where u see the difference in quotes then I can understand better.

Sorry, I am not going to give any more evidence/logic. The differences should be clear to those who want to see them. If you still think that all versions are "more or less same", then well, fine by me! The omission you consider as small change is very important to me; as are the other things I have mentioned earlier.

Anyways, there is no onus (burden or responsibility) on me here to prove it beyond reasonable doubt to you....;)
 
Sorry, I am not going to give any more evidence/logic. The differences should be clear to those who want to see them. If you still think that all versions are "more or less same", then well, fine by me! The omission you consider as small change is very important to me; as are the other things I have mentioned earlier.

Anyways, there is no onus (burden or responsibility) on me here to prove it beyond reasonable doubt to you....;)

Yes, yes Dhnayvad, I understand.
 
No honour, only killings

Alok Tiwari, 21 June 2010, 11:20 AM IST

Like the scourges of dowry and female foeticide a generation ago, honour killings seem to be spreading to newer areas. They appear to be leaving a countrywide footprint, as if angry conscience keepers of Indian families have suddenly discovered a new way of keeping things under the lid. Not very long ago, we thought such barbarism belonged to remote tribal reaches of Pakistan. We now know it is very much at home in the Indian middle class.

Many of us are plainly baffled by the phenomenon. This is so much at odds with the new India that we hope and dream about. At one end of the social spectrum, we have not just intercaste or intercommunity but also inter-religion marriages being accepted as normal. At the other end we have parents and relatives poisoning, hacking, and burning alive youngsters because they married on their own, in the name of family honour.

But is it actually for the sake of family honour? I doubt. Is family honour compromised only when a youngster marries outside the caste? There are indeed a number of things held dear by traditional Indian family that individuals go against. For example, most of us swear by honesty. But no one has ever heard of a parent setting his son on fire because he turned out to be a corrupt government servant. Indeed, families have rallied to protect their own even when a member has been publicly exposed, arrested, and charged for demanding and accepting bribes. In a country having scams galore from national to local level, isn’t it amazing that there has been no killing to wipe away the blot of corruption?

Similarly, our obsession with sexual abstinence borders on prudery. Yet, there is no accompanying outrage when we find even minor girls being subjected to sexual abuse within families. There have been numerous reports of fathers setting themselves upon their daughters. The best even outraged mothers have done faced with this monstrosity is to report the culprit to the police.

Finally, how khap panchayats have ruled against politicians from community who did not keep their word? Isn’t the community honour compromised when a leader, after having asked for votes in the name of caste, turns his back on it. What when such a politicians defects to another party and otherwise behaves in a manner that leaves his voters wringing their hands in frustration. One doesn’t remember a panchayat turning family of such a person out of the village or sending murderous mobs to lynch him.

The fact is, what we are seeing are not honour killings at all. To even call them that is to lend them a measure of respectability. It implies such despicable behaviour by someone as to smear the family name irretrievably. These are murders to defend an old order that has nothing but contempt for individual freedom.

The sentiment that makes a parent poison her daughter is same as one that makes a principal thrash a student - the rage at seeing someone they believe should be in their control act independently. We support our children well into their adulthood. All we want in return is their freedom. It enrages us to see them take decisions on their own, especially decisions that we do not approve of. These killings are not going away until we give up our control mania and bring in more individual liberties in our homes.

Well Balanced and Thought Provoking Article : Specifically for those who support so called "honour" killing
 
No honour, only killings

Alok Tiwari, 21 June 2010, 11:20 AM IST


Finally, how khap panchayats have ruled against politicians from community who did not keep their word? Isn’t the community honour compromised when a leader, after having asked for votes in the name of caste, turns his back on it. What when such a politicians defects to another party and otherwise behaves in a manner that leaves his voters wringing their hands in frustration. One doesn’t remember a panchayat turning family of such a person out of the village or sending murderous mobs to lynch him.


Well Balanced and Thought Provoking Article : Specifically for those who support so called "honour" killing


For some time , I used to wonder why other moderators, objected to people simply copying and pasting articles.

This above article is one such that would raise the ire of any moderator.

Satyendra,

What is so balanced and thought provoking about this article?

What does this have to with the Jats?

What does this have to with the Jat Khaps?

On the last two counts , I certainly cannot see any connections.

If you or anyone else see the connection, please educate me and others.

If not, please control what what you post.

We will not allow a free for all!
.

Best regards


Ravi Chaudhary
 
Last edited:
No honour, only killings

Alok Tiwari, 21 June 2010, 11:20 AM IST


Finally, how khap panchayats have ruled against politicians from community who did not keep their word? Isn’t the community honour compromised when a leader, after having asked for votes in the name of caste, turns his back on it. What when such a politicians defects to another party and otherwise behaves in a manner that leaves his voters wringing their hands in frustration. One doesn’t remember a panchayat turning family of such a person out of the village or sending murderous mobs to lynch him.

Well Balanced and Thought Provoking Article : Specifically for those who support so called "honour" killing


I will pose another question to Satyendra!

Where have any Jats, or their community gatherings( Khaps, panchyats, etc ) , supported any politician on the platform that they would support the politician , if the politician supported ' honour killings'?

Please provide the evidence!!!.


Ravi Chaudhary
 
Satyendra,

Dont take these guys like Sukhbir siwatch and Alok tiwari seriously. He is presenting the hisar(suryanagar) issue as anti jat but the truth is that an incident happened and than chudas came in large number to beat the jat guy. Luckily he has gun license and he fired in air. Then chudas almost killed two cid officer. Then jats(at night) saw some chudas on their roof with inflamable materials. There is a police chowki nearby. they called police. Police saw petrol bottle in their hand. police called them down. Since then they had 3 fire brigades always standing in that area. Their plan was to lit their houses and demand compensation. This was foiled and than lot of chudas said to panchayat that they have no idea whose fault it is and locked their houses and ran to their village. Only 3 houses were saying that its jat's fault. Panchayat gave them 10 days to do a compromise otherwise they asked police to take whatever action they think is right.
Now read the great Mr Siwatch here on this http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/khaplandtales/entry/animal-tales-from-jatland

In one another article they were talking about satrod khap. People in that area used to leave about 70 villages for marriages. The pardhan's son was talking about reducing this to a block of 10-15 villages. I am not sure what exactly he said but looks like they want to reduce that 70 villages bhaichara to 10-15 villages block which makes sense as people in that area have to go very far to find a match and see below how the news was presented.

But all is not dark. Close to Narnoud is the Satror Khap comprising 40-50 villages that do not traditionally have intra-village marriages. "There are efforts now," says pradhan Inder Singh of Putthi village, "to break these up into smaller units -- tapas -- of 10-12 villages, where inter-marriage would be allowed."

It is not a sentimental decision. Says the pradhan's son, Bhagat Singh, a schoolteacher: "There are very few girls left and too many boys. Who will the boys marry otherwise?"

http://www.jatland.com/forums/showt...ts-by-MahaPanchayat-How-much-you-agree/page19



Also i am pretty sure in Siwatch's area they dont have gotra khap. Khap dont interfere in inter-caste marriage as far as i know. The issue was basically his family issue. He generalised it to portray all jats in bad color. Let me twist it in another direction. He said his father 'OKayed' the marriage and most of the resistance was from girls' side (means a different caste not Jats). His sister also has inter-caste marriage. Means his dad okayed it. Means a jat okayed it. He said "The objection from her family sounded ridiculous. "We don't have a problem with you. But it's the caste, that is the only hurdle," said her angry brother, when he came to know about our relationship. Lol U are in fact portraying Jats more 'liberal', 'open minded' than this other caste. Now could you please tell me the caste of his wife. :D :D



I am sure Mr Siwatch know this as all this happened in open. But they just twist it in a diff manner to portray jats as villian. I dont know y they do this. For cheap publicity or their venom against jats?




Someone told me yesterday that this Mr Satyendra is actually Mr Siwatch. I dont know if this is right but u can tell more about it :tamatar:confused::rock:boxing:p:mad:
 
Last edited:
Very good Vipin....

Satyendra,

Dont take these guys like Sukhbir siwatch and Alok tiwari seriously. He is presenting the hisar(suryanagar) issue as anti jat but the truth is that an incident happened and than chudas came in large number to beat the jat guy. Luckily he has gun license and he fired in air. Then chudas almost killed two cid officer. Then jats(at night) saw some chudas on their roof with inflamable materials. There is a police chowki nearby. they called police. Police saw petrol bottle in their hand. police called them down. Since then they had 3 fire brigades always standing in that area. Their plan was to lit their houses and demand compensation. This was foiled and than lot of chudas said to panchayat that they have no idea whose fault it is and locked their houses and ran to their village. Only 3 houses were saying that its jat's fault. Panchayat gave them 10 days to do a compromise otherwise they asked police to take whatever action they think is right.
Now read the great Mr Siwatch here on this http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/khaplandtales/entry/animal-tales-from-jatland

In one another article they were talking about satrod khap. People in that area used to leave about 70 villages for marriages. The pardhan's son was talking about reducing this to a block of 10-15 villages. I am not sure what exactly he said but looks like they want to reduce that 70 villages bhaichara to 10-15 villages block which makes sense as people in that area have to go very far to find a match and see below how the news was presented.

But all is not dark. Close to Narnoud is the Satror Khap comprising 40-50 villages that do not traditionally have intra-village marriages. "There are efforts now," says pradhan Inder Singh of Putthi village, "to break these up into smaller units -- tapas -- of 10-12 villages, where inter-marriage would be allowed."

It is not a sentimental decision. Says the pradhan's son, Bhagat Singh, a schoolteacher: "There are very few girls left and too many boys. Who will the boys marry otherwise?"

http://www.jatland.com/forums/showt...ts-by-MahaPanchayat-How-much-you-agree/page19



Also i am pretty sure in Siwatch's area they dont have gotra khap. Khap dont interfere in inter-caste marriage as far as i know. The issue was basically his family issue. He generalised it to portray all jats in bad color. Let me twist it in another direction. He said his father 'OKayed' the marriage and most of the resistance was from girls' side (means a different caste not Jats). His sister also has inter-caste marriage. Means his dad okayed it. Means a jat okayed it. He said "The objection from her family sounded ridiculous. "We don't have a problem with you. But it's the caste, that is the only hurdle," said her angry brother, when he came to know about our relationship. Lol U are in fact portraying Jats more 'liberal', 'open minded' than this other caste. Now could you please tell me the caste of his wife. :D :D



I am sure Mr Siwatch know this as all this happened in open. But they just twist it in a diff manner to portray jats as villian. I dont know y they do this. For cheap publicity or their venom against jats?




Someone told me yesterday that this Mr Satyendra is actually Mr Siwatch. I dont know if this is right but u can tell more about it :tamatar:confused::rock:boxing:p:mad:
 
Dear All,

Firstly let me clarify I am not Mr.Siwatch in fact I got to know about him only thru Jatland posts few days back , honestly Vipin wat made u think so?? ..lol
Secondly my intention behind putting this article was not to criticize our community and Khaps. Raviji this article is just raising few questions to the society and the Hypocrisy we all follow.The author might have taken example of Khaps (due to recent incidents) and I hope you understand that its not possible for me to get primary evidence for every news article otherwise I would myself have been journalist.
Major question this article raises is that on one hand inter caste , intra gotra marriages are considered to bring dis respect to the family and to save "honour" killing is justified by the family but on the other hand same family will protect the person if he is caught into corruption, rape charges , dowry etc or at least not kill or ostracize him. Is the family honour only limited to marriage ??
Again these journalists may be exaggerating the incidents and genralizing them but the fact is these thing do happen in our community. I agree it happens across North India including other communities as well but that doesn't mean what we are following or supporting is right.
Now dont get me wrong I am not aginst Jat Traditions/customs or Khaps . I think we should be flexible and modify our customs/thinking with time.
Lastly as I say always we can at east be little tolerant and in this forum little open.

Regards,
Satyendra
 
Dear All,

Firstly let me clarify I am not Mr.Siwatch in fact I got to know about him only thru Jatland posts few days back , honestly Vipin wat made u think so?? ..lol

Satyendra someone told me this yesterday(in chaupal, Sorry cant tell u who) and as I said i dont know if its right. But since u said u are not, I believe u.
 
Last edited:
Dear All,

Firstly let me clarify I am not Mr.Siwatch in fact I got to know about him only thru Jatland posts few days back , honestly Vipin wat made u think so?? ..lol
Secondly my intention behind putting this article was not to criticize our community and Khaps. Raviji this article is just raising few questions to the society and the Hypocrisy we all follow.The author might have taken example of Khaps (due to recent incidents) and I hope you understand that its not possible for me to get primary evidence for every news article otherwise I would myself have been journalist.
Major question this article raises is that on one hand inter caste , intra gotra marriages are considered to bring dis respect to the family and to save "honour" killing is justified by the family but on the other hand same family will protect the person if he is caught into corruption, rape charges , dowry etc or at least not kill or ostracize him. Is the family honour only limited to marriage ??
Again these journalists may be exaggerating the incidents and genralizing them but the fact is these thing do happen in our community. I agree it happens across North India including other communities as well but that doesn't mean what we are following or supporting is right.
Now dont get me wrong I am not aginst Jat Traditions/customs or Khaps . I think we should be flexible and modify our customs/thinking with time.
Lastly as I say always we can at east be little tolerant and in this forum little open.

Regards,
Satyendra

Satyendra,

Dont mind but I think you are mixing too many issues together. Also 'honour kiliing' is justified??? I dont know what u mean by this. But I personally know some families where they didnt kill the children. Its not that every incident end in killing. Killing can happen even where there is no marriage like a girl run away with XYZ. But this has nothing to do with khaps or our traditions. In city they dont move but in village they leave the village and move to some other village. The main reason is shame and reputation. A person who know our village structure would understand this.
 
Last edited:
Dear All,

l
Secondly my intention behind putting this article was not to criticize our community and Khaps. Raviji this article is just raising few questions to the society and the Hypocrisy we all follow.The author might have taken example of Khaps (due to recent incidents) and I hope you understand that its not possible for me to get primary evidence for every news article otherwise I would myself have been journalist.
Major question this article raises is that on one hand inter caste , intra gotra marriages are considered to bring dis respect to the family and to save "honour" killing is justified by the family but on the other hand same family will protect the person if he is caught into corruption, rape charges , dowry etc or at least not kill or ostracize him. Is the family honour only limited to marriage ??
Again these journalists may be exaggerating the incidents and genralizing them but the fact is these thing do happen in our community. I agree it happens across North India including other communities as well but that doesn't mean what we are following or supporting is right.
Now dont get me wrong I am not aginst Jat Traditions/customs or Khaps . I think we should be flexible and modify our customs/thinking with time.
Lastly as I say always we can at east be little tolerant and in this forum little open.

Regards,
Satyendra

Dear Satyendra

Your response,is disingenous.

It appears that you are confusing the issue.

It is not upto the rest of us to solve your problem, that you cannot ( or even do not wish to) get primary evidence. The issue is that you are too ready to believe journalists like Siwach or others that you quote, without analyzing what they say or seeking to get to the bottom of the matter.

If one is not hypocritical, it is imperative to obtain the necessary primary evidence.

The opportunity to obtain the evidence is there.

First: Educate oneself on the background material, historical and traditional. There is plenty of it on this site. That is also primary evidence.

Second: Analyize critically what the media writes. Take the help of others to go deeper.

If you do not wish to get the evidence, then you do not have a right to criticize.

It does not do, to simply ask members here to display tolerance, or to accuse them of hypocricy.

I am going to suggest you take a break from posting , and read up on the material , especially the books that have been put online , with so much selfless effort by Luxman Burdakji and others.


We are, here, past the point of 'cut and paste posts' or 'reactive posts'.

We need, to discuss where we go from here, and at the same time to discuss how to handle, and then handle, those who do not wish the community well.


Best regards

Ravi Chaudhary
 
Back
Top