So why the big fuss over Kejriwal's stand on khap?

There is legal merit in AAP leader’s remarks: not khaps but their crimes need to be targeted

shantanu

Shantanu Datta | February 3, 2014


Arvind Kejriwal: Being misinterpreted. Deliberately?
Arvind Kejriwal: Being misinterpreted. Deliberately?

Yes, khaps should be banned, if you ask me. But don’t ask me, for I will say religion, too, should be banned – and for more or less the same reasons that supreme court offered while calling them kangaroo courts in 2011: "Atrocities with respect to personal lives of people, committed by brutal, feudal minded persons deserve harsh punishment."

So let’s take a deep breath, keep our emotions from running over and keep the prejudice locked away while contending that Kejriwal ‘supports’ khap. He said, as quoted by Reuters, “Khap panchayats are a group of people who come together. There is no bar on people to assemble in this country.” That is, unless you impose section 144 CrPC across rural swathes where khaps are reported to operate from.

Kejriwal also said, “(But) whenever they take a wrong decision, whenever they take an illegal decision, they ought to be punished."

The problem, so far as the central government is concerned, is khaps issuing diktats on inter-caste, -religious, -clan etc marriages, and ordering ‘honour killing’, as the murders of the young victims are dubbed. That is why the supreme court, in July last year, asked the UPA government to “make its stand clear on a plea seeking action against the diktats of 'Khap Panchayats' such as harassing young couples for entering into inter-caste or intra-gotra marriages in the name of family or social honour”. "Why don't you file an affidavit and make your stand clear on the issue? You say as to what action you propose to take on the law commission's report," a bench of justices CK Prasad and Ranjana P Desai said, as reported by PTI).

The law commission has sought enactment of the Prohibition of Unlawful Assembly (Interference with the Freedom of Matrimonial Alliances) Bill, 2011.

Besides various other measures, here’s what the proposed law says: "no person or any group of persons shall gather with an intention to deliberate on, or condemn any marriage, not prohibited by law, on the ground that such marriage has dishonoured the caste or community tradition or brought disrepute to all or any of the persons forming part of the assembly or the family or the people of the locality concerned."

Now, on whom is the onus to ‘ban’ khaps? The central government or states? Has any state banned khaps?

If the law commission’s jurisdiction is restricted to barring only “gathering” of people “with an intention to deliberate on, or condemn any marriage, not prohibited by law”, who is Kejriwal to seek a ban on the whole idea – even if it’s a bad idea, like fellow undemocratic ideas such as prohibition – of khap panchayat? Why, indeed, should he be expected to propose any such ban?

Whenever a khap decides to “condemn” any such marriage – with or without the diktat of ‘honour killing’ – it would be a criminal case, once the bill is passed, and would be dealt under criminal law. And Kejriwal’s stand is clear on that: “...whenever they take a wrong decision, whenever they take an illegal decision, they ought to be punished."

This is not to condone what khaps do – they are a regressive, anti-women, even misogynistic, obscurantist bunch of men gathered, purportedly with an aim to run their gun. Unfortunately, that’s the brief many religious organisations and agents, as well as some socio-cultural-political outfits hold. And, fortunately or unfortunately, per se they cannot be banned in the name of democracy.

Comments

 

Other News

From Shah Bano to Shayara Bano: How Rajiv’s blunder undid secularism

History could have repeated itself as a farce, but in the triple talaq case today, there has been no replay. A historic blunder has been undone, though it has taken three decades. The supreme court has once again taken a stance in favour of individual freedom and against fundamentalism &nda

Train passengers die as rail safety panel recommendations gather dust

 The derailment of Puri-Haridwar Kalinga Utkal express at Khatauli has once again raised serious questions on the railways’ safety claims. At least 21 people were killed and many were injured. The derailments over a period of a few months are giving sleepless nights to the top railway.

Political parties support triple talaq verdict

The BJP as well as the Congress welcomed the supreme court judgment that bars instant triple talaq for a period of six months and also seeks a legislation on it.   BJP chief Amit Shah said that he welcomes this on behalf of the party and added “it’s not about anyo

5 judges, 5 faiths, 1 verdict

Five judges from five different faiths deliberated upon and decided that instant triple talaq is to be struck down for a period of six months and the government should bring a legislation over it.   The supreme court bench was headed by chief justice of India J S Khehar, who

REC, PFC didn’t conduct appropriate due diligence: CAG

Rural Electrification Corporation Limited (REC) and Power Finance Corporation Limited (PFC) did not conduct appropriate due diligence during credit appraisal in power generation projects and in the process assumed higher risks on the loan accounts, noted the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) in a rep

Triple talaq verdict historic, says Modi

Prime minister Narendra Modi described as “historic” the supreme court judgment that struck down triple talaq for a period of six months.   “Judgment of the Hon`ble SC on Triple Talaq is historic. It grants equality to Muslim women and is a powerful measure



Video

Current Issue

Opinion

Facebook    Twitter    Google Plus    Linkedin    Subscribe Newsletter

Twitter