UCC - Is Merely an Attempt to Undo the Existing Muslim Law, Sixth Schedule Laws'

 UCC Is Merely an Attempt to Undo the Existing Muslim Law, Sixth Schedule Laws'

The All India Democratic Women's Association has said that a Uniform Civil Code alone will not result in women getting equal rights, as uniformity does not mean equality.

'UCC Is Merely an Attempt to Undo the Existing Muslim Law, Sixth Schedule Laws'

Representative image. Photo: An4shubam/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0

Support Us

COMMUNALISMGOVERNMENTLAWWOMEN

13/JUL/2023

New Delhi: In its submission to the Law Commission of India, the All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) has said that a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) alone will not result in women getting equal rights, as uniformity does not mean equality.

Speaking from the organisation’s experience of dealing with personal laws and actively engaging in previous reform measures, the submission says, “We strongly feel that the UCC is merely an attempt to undo the existing Muslim Law and laws which come under the Sixth Schedule, pertaining to the tribal areas. In keeping with democratic norms, this can only be done after extensive discussions with the communities involved.

“…We apprehend that on the pretext of re-examining the need for a UCC, the effort will largely be to bring in uniform laws which will be majoritarian laws, and not laws which give substantive equal rights to women. As said earlier, uniformity of law by itself will not result in equality for women, and in fact will probably result in duplicating Hindu laws and its gender biases on all communities.”

AIDWA has also asked why the Law Commission is once again opening up the UCC debate and asking for public opinion, since “the 21st Law Commission, in 2018, had also agreed with our view that a UCC was neither desirable or necessary to align personal law with the fundamental rights of women including substantive equality”.

Read the full text of AIDWA’s submission below.

§

To

The Member Secretary,

Law Commission of India

4th floor, Lok Nayak Bhavan,

Khan Market, New Delhi.

This is with reference to the Public Notice issued by you on the 14th of June 2023 eliciting views on the need for a UCC again. We write to you on behalf of the All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA), a women’s organization with a membership of more than a crore across the country. Women in our country have been suffering for centuries under the burden of patriarchal and discriminatory personal laws in all religious communities. We are not in favour of a UCC as just having uniform laws will not result in women getting equal rights or in wiping out the discrimination inherent, in various degrees, in these laws. This is because uniformity per se does not mean equality and cannot be equated with equality and justice for women. We also feel that uniformity is neither necessary nor desirable in India today.

Also read: BJP’s Clamour for Uniform Civil Code Driven by Aim of Dividing, Not Uniting, Indians

Our organization has dealt with issues of personal law for the last 40 years and is actively engaged in each State in dealing with personal law cases of women in various Legal Cells. AIDWA has unequivocally stood for reform and for equality and non-discrimination in each personal law and has campaigned for reform in the personal laws of all communities. For instance, amongst other reforms, it has actively participated in bringing about reform in the Hindu Succession Act; in the Indian Divorce Act relating to Christians and in the campaign against Triple Talak. All these reform efforts have taken place along with and in consultation with members of the various communities particularly women of these communities.  AIDWA has followed a two-pronged strategy of supporting reforms within each community and in bringing about common laws where there is a gap in personal laws or when such laws are necessary to do justice to women. Thus, AIDWA has participated in the struggle for and supported the reforms in Dowry Laws, The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, the Law against Sexual Harassment at the Work Place and the Law against Domestic Violence which also gives the right to residence and monetary compensation, apart from other Laws.

We are surprised that the 22nd Law Commission is again examining the issue of a Uniform Civil Code as the 21st Law Commission had already categorically expressed its views against it. The 21st Law Commission, in 2018, had also agreed with our view that a UCC was neither desirable or necessary to align personal law with the fundamental rights of women including substantive equality. The 21st Law Commission had taken extensive evidence on the issue, carried out extensive research, participated in many seminars and discussions, and had then opined that the time was not ripe for a UCC as stated below;

“Various aspects of prevailing personal laws deprivilege women. This Commission is of the view that it is discrimination and not difference which lies at the root of inequality. In order to address this inequality, the Commission has suggested a range of amendments to existing family laws ……… This Commission has therefore dealt with laws that are discriminatory rather than providing a uniform civil code which is neither necessary nor desirable at this stage. Most countries are now moving towards recognition of difference, and the mere existence of difference does not imply discrimination, but is indicative of a robust democracy.”

We do not understand the need to engage in this exercise again through a vaguely worded notice which provides no blueprint of what the Law Commission has conceptualized. Further, by asking for opinions within an extremely limited period of a month we feel that this is not a serious attempt to get the opinions of various organizations and people working on the issue, but is just a formality. It seems that the Law Commission has an agenda to somehow recommend a UCC as the BJP Government of various States and the Prime Minister himself has recently spoken in favour of it. We are also surprised that the Law Commission has specifically asked only various religious bodies for their opinion. The UCC is an issue which concerns women’s rights and equality and the Law Commission should prioritize all those working on the issue including women of the communities. The present exercise therefore to re-examine the issue at the behest of the government is to bring about a UCC against the wishes of most women’s organizations and groups and the minority communities who had not asked for it. It is clear that this agenda is also being actively pursued by various BJP led governments in States like Uttarakhand who have openly declared their intention to bring about a Uniform Civil Code.

Also read: BJP Equates UCC With Gender Justice. But Can It End Discrimination In-Built in Personal Laws?

The present government has a bad track record as far as reforms for women’s equal rights are concerned. It has never prioritized gender justice or carried out a single reform for women.  Despite several demands to reform some of the Hindu personal laws, for instance, no action has been taken by the Government to change these laws and bring equitable laws for these women.

We strongly feel that the UCC is merely an attempt to undo the existing Muslim Law and laws which come under the Sixth Schedule, pertaining to the tribal areas. In keeping with democratic norms, this can only be done after extensive discussions with the communities involved.

We have seen how Muslim girls have been targeted for exercising their choice to wear a Hijab, and how this has affected their fundamental right to education. Also, the Central Government without protecting the rights of divorced Muslim women, initiated the law to put Muslim men in jail with an obvious communal intent for a practice that the Supreme Court had already declared null and void. Muslim youth who have been in consensual relationships with Hindu women have been targeted and jailed in several fictitious cases of ‘Love Jihad’.

We apprehend that on the pretext of re-examining the need for a UCC, the effort will largely be to bring in uniform laws which will be majoritarian laws, and not laws which give substantive equal rights to women. As said earlier, uniformity of law by itself will not result in equality for women, and in fact will probably result in duplicating Hindu laws and its gender biases on all communities

Hindu women in our country have suffered because they do not have equal guardianship rights over their children. They also do not have equal rights over marital property. This is property which is acquired by either party during the subsistence of a marriage, and several countries recognize that women have an equal share in this property. Recently a Judgement of the Madras High Court recognised the equal value of a woman’s household work and held that she was entitled to an equal share of the assets acquired by the parties, whether she had financially contributed towards them or not. However, despite several women’s organizations and groups asking for this, there has been no response from the government.

Another law which our organization and others have been demanding is a stand-alone and comprehensive law to deal with crimes and killings in the name of honour. This law was envisaged to punish both members and extended members of the family as well as community panchayats, who torture and harass young couples and deny them their choice in marriages and relationships. Though AIDWA gave proposals for such a law in 2005 and also to the present Government, nothing has been done.

Similarly, Hindu and other women do not have equal land rights in agricultural property in some states, including Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand. Both these states exclude married daughters from inheriting these properties on specious grounds. Though the Hindu Succession Act was amended in 2005 to remove an exception which exempted agricultural land from the purview of the HSA, the inheritance to agricultural land continues to be governed by some state laws which actively stop women from this inheritance. In fact, these laws have been placed in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution with the intention of keeping them outside the purview of courts. The Hindu Succession Act also contains an unfair and unjust provision for succession to a woman’s self-acquired property which privileges her husband’s heirs over her own in the absence of her husband and children. However, this has also not been amended.

Similarly, we had suggested that the Special Marriage Act be amended to remove the one-month notice and waiting period for a marriage to take place under it. This would facilitate more secular marriages and marriages by choice. It is well known that the one-month notice period, in fact, gives time to all sorts of objections by members of a girl’s or boy’s family, who do not want the marriage to take place.

These are some of the suggestions that have been made for several years by us and other women’s organizations to bring about equal rights for women. However, previous and the current Government have consistently ignored these demands. On the other hand, some State governments have raised the bogey of Love Jihad and brought about draconian anti-conversion laws to stop inter-faith marriages by choice and are now seeking to bring about a Uniform Civil Code for the sake of uniformity, per se. There is also talk of a law for divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage. However, this would leave most women without any means of survival unless they have an equal right to marital property and proper maintenance laws.

India has a rich tradition of both plural family laws and common laws in areas in which family laws don’t exist. As stated earlier the Dowry Prohibition Act, the Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act are common laws which apply to all communities, as can a law on the crimes and killings in the name of ‘honour’ and a law on equal rights to marital property. Simultaneously, reforms within personal laws should take place at the behest of members particularly women of the concerned community and the women’s movement.

We request the Law Commission not to re-examine the issue merely because the Government is determined to bring about a UCC.

Given our experience in the field, we would also like to give oral evidence to the Law Commission when it calls us. We feel that women’s organizations and groups and others concerned with the issue must be widely consulted by the Law Commission, particularly women from the minority communities and Tribal women before it decides to recommend a UCC.

UCC - Can BJP End Discrimination In-Built in Personal Laws?

 BJP Equates UCC With Gender Justice. But Can It End Discrimination In-Built in Personal Laws?

Representative image. Photo: Paul Simpson/Flickr CC BY NC ND 2.0

Support Us

POLITICSRIGHTSWOMEN

06/JUL/2023

New Delhi: As the BJP continues to push for a Uniform Civil Code (UCC), the party has equated its calls for “One Nation, One Constitution” with the need to ensure gender justice.

00:00

Previous

PlayNext

00:00 / 03:02

Mute

Settings

Fullscreen

Copy video url

Play / Pause

Mute / Unmute

Report a problem

Language

Share

Vidverto Player

The 21st Law Commission’s report called for amending existing personal laws to end discrimination against women. Its report in 2018 said: “This Commission is of the view that it is discrimination and not difference which lies at the root of inequality.”

However, the 22nd Law Commission last month sought fresh inputs on the issue.

Subsequently, Prime Minister Narendra Modi at a rally in Bhopal also made a strong push for the UCC, which has once again renewed the debate around the contentious issue.

Opposition parties have accused the saffron party of using the issue as a religious polarisation tool and election rhetoric.

For the BJP, however, the push for a UCC has been ensconced in the idea of gender justice since the promise first made an appearance in the party’s manifesto in 1996. 

Speaking to The Wire, R.P. Singh, national spokesperson for the BJP said: “It (UCC) is only for gender justice. A woman should get equal rights across all communities, caste, colour, creed. A Muslim couple cannot adopt a child because they don’t have adoption rights.”

“Why should the girls’ marriage age be 15 and not 18 countrywide for all communities? Or why shouldn’t inheritance law be equal for all women in the country? Why should women suffer polygamy? These are concerns,” he said.

“It is not that a woman from a particular religion will get special rights or my daughter will get special rights but my daughter-in-law will not if she comes from a separate religion,” Singh said.

What BJP manifestos say

As mentioned, earlier, since the UCC first made its appearance in the BJP’s poll manifesto in 1996, it has been presented as a way to ensure gender equality. Here’s what each BJP manifesto says:

In the 1996 manifesto, the UCC is mentioned under the heading “Nari Shakti: Towards Empowerment”.

In the 1998 manifesto, the UCC once again finds mention under the section titled “Nari Shakti: Empowerment of Women”.

In the BJP’s 2004 election manifesto, the UCC first finds mention under the section “Our Basic Mission and Commitments” as “Consensus over Uniform Civil Code”. It also promises a UCC under the section on Nari Shakti to ensure gender equality and end the legal validity of “regressive personal laws”.

In its 2009 manifesto, the BJP once again promised to set up a commission to draft a UCC.

In its 2014 manifesto, the BJP said: “BJP believes that there cannot be gender equality till such time India adopts a Uniform Civil Code..”

The exact same wording for the promise and need for the UCC is also found in the 2019 election manifesto under the Cultural Heritage section.

Representative image. Photo: PTI

Need to reform personal laws

According to legal experts and rights activists, the UCC is not a necessary corollary for gender-just legal reforms.

Speaking to The Wire, women’s rights lawyer Flavia Agnes said that the 21st Law Commission’s recommendation to reform personal laws was a better strategy for gender-just rules.

In its 2018 report, the 21st Law Commission, while noting that a UCC is “neither desirable nor necessary at this stage”, added that “various aspects of prevailing personal laws disprivilege women.”

“They recommended that the discrimination against women in all personal laws should be taken up and amended. So, I think that is a better strategy for gender justice than a UCC which is particularly controversial for the minorities,” Agnes said.

“But the government has not implemented anything [based on the law commission’s recommendations] in the last few years. Instead, the government is adamant on UCC as it is a political move just before the elections because it has become about bashing the Muslims.”

Also Read: The UCC Bogey Is Raked Up for Muslim Bashing and to Serve Electoral Needs: Flavia Agnes

Sarasu Esther Thomas, professor of law at National Law School of India University, Bangalore and an expert in family law, told The Wire that there can be gender justice without a UCC. “Practically you can have smaller laws which are uniform which promote gender justice instead of trying to change all the laws together, which is not a practical exercise at all.”

She said one good example of such implementation is the Domestic Violence Act, which is applicable to all women regardless of their personal laws – which, she said, “is a uniform civil code in that sense in a particular area”.

“These small incremental changes are what would be useful instead of having something big which may not be deliverable,” Thomas said.

Zakia Soman, a founding member of the rights group Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan, said that while the UCC was originally about bringing gender justice, Muslim women have “lost out” in the absence of codified personal laws.

“Originally, the UCC has been about gender justice then other ways were found and Hindu women benefited from it through codified laws (Hindu Code Bill),” she told The Wire.

“For the last 20 years we have been demanding codified Muslim laws but no one has been listening to us, whether the clergy or government. There is a disparity and discrimination that Muslim women are facing because we don’t have rights like Hindu and Christian women because our laws are not reformed and in the absence of codified Muslim family laws, the only opportunity is UCC,” she said.

However, concerns remain around the Hindu Code Bill – which includes laws relating to marriage, succession and inheritance that were codified and passed in the 1950s – that it continues to discriminate on the basis of gender.

“Different laws that apply to Hindus are not all gender-just. If you look at the Hindu Succession Act, for instance, if a man dies and his wife has predeceased him and they don’t have children, then his property goes to his family. But if a woman dies and her husband has died earlier and they don’t have children, then her property does not go to her family but goes to her husband’s relatives,” said Thomas.

There are various provisions that make it clear that these laws cannot be a blueprint for a UCC because they are not gender-just, she said. In that regard, the Parsi or Christian systems are better, Thomas opined.

Complicating matters further is the diversity built into personal laws.

“Though there is a Hindu Marriage Act, it is not uniform. It recognises diversity and has provisions for customary divorce and varies from custom to custom. Neither is it uniform nor gender-just,” she added.

Representative image. Photo: An4shubam/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0

Several BJP-ruled states – including Madhya Pradesh, Assam, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana – have considered the implementation of a UCC. 

The Uttarakhand government has recently said that a draft of its UCC is ready. According to an Indian Express report, the Uttarakhand draft may serve as a template for the Union government.

At present, the only state in the country with a uniform code in Goa. The Goa Civil Code is derived from the Portuguese Civil Code of 1867.

Goa’s BJP chief minister Pramod Sawant has also held up the Goa Civil Code as a potential model for the UCC, and said that those opposing such a law “do not want gender equality and women’s empowerment”.

According to Agnes, while the Goa Code receives much attention and praise, it is by no means gender-just.

“It is not uniform at all and codified Hindu law does not apply to Goa. For instance, in Goa, if a Hindu man’s wife doesn’t bear a child till 25 or a male child till the age of 30, the husband can marry again. We are not understanding the intricacies of each of these laws and pronouncing Goa as a shining example.”

Uniformity in gender justice is the goal

Experts say that any new legislation that seeks to bring uniformity must first ensure an end to gender discrimination.

“The first non-negotiable aspect of any future code, whether the UCC or common law or secular law, is upholding gender justice under all circumstances,” said Soman.

“So that would also mean legally allowing same-sex marriages, allowing entry to all women across all castes and faiths to all places of worship, rooting out killings in the name of ‘love jihad’, and protection to women against marital rape.”

The Modi government has opposed same-sex marriages in the Supreme Court, and has earlier also said that criminalising marital rape will have “social implications”.

“So the contradictions in the government’s policy also have to be brought out and need to be addressed,” said Soman.

Also Read: What a Gender-Just Uniform Civil Code Could Look Like

According to Thomas, there is already a range of problems that need to be addressed in the existing laws urgently.

“This includes talking about succession beyond the gender binary. If you have a transgender child, do you treat them as a son or a daughter? If a transgender person dies, do you apply the succession laws of a Hindu man or a Hindu woman? These problems are already there which need to be sorted out and dealt with urgently.”

“In addition, some laws entirely exclude the LGBTQI community, illegitimate children and women who are in non-marital relationships. So, those have to be addressed as well.”

UCC - What a Gender-Just Uniform Civil Code Could Look Like

 What a Gender-Just Uniform Civil Code Could Look Like

If we are to believe that the government has finally woken up from its slumber (just in time for the 2024 general elections), and is now determined to enact a UCC, we are in a position to decide on supporting it only when we know its contents. 

What a Gender-Just Uniform Civil Code Could Look Like

'While it is not easy to believe in the bona fides of a government that ignored the Law Commission's call for gender-just reforms in family laws for five long years (2018-2023), a wish list of what a gender-just UCC could consist of has the potential to concretise and ground the discussions on UCC.' Photo: imke.sta/Flickr (CC BY-SA 2.0)

02/JUL/2023

In the wake of the Law Commission of India’s call for views on the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) from the public at large, advocacy in favour of the UCC has centred on three distinct premises:

a) a bashing of Muslim family law, and by extension, the Muslim community as regressive, conservative, orthodox, patriarchal and resistant to change;

b) a projection of Hindu family law as progressive, inclusive, and gender-just, which must be emulated and extended to all communities in India; and

c) the UCC as an imperative for national integration and women’s equal rights in family law.  

The Law Commission, in its Consultation Paper of 2018, had debunked all three premises.

It highlighted positive aspects of Muslim law such as the concept of mehr and a one-third limit for willing away property, which ensures that some property is available to the legal heirs, including daughters and other women, by succession. The Law Commission also elaborately discussed the discriminatory aspects that continue to irk Hindu family law, and even called for the abolition of Hindu Undivided Family and the Hindu coparcenary with its right by birth in ancestral property.

The Law Commission categorically stated that secularism cannot be contradictory to pluralism and that national integration cannot be advanced through the UCC when “cultural difference informs people’s identity, and its preservation guarantees the territorial integrity of the nation.”

It prioritised gender equality within each religious community, rather than between communities, as discrimination, not difference, lies at the roots of inequality.

Given the constitutional protection and autonomy given to tribal communities in Sixth Schedule states, it also found it necessary to preserve their distinct family law systems and introduce gender-just reforms from within rather than from above.  

Keeping key principles such as equality, non-discrimination, personal autonomy and agency, inclusivity, fairness and secularism at the centrality of a potential UCC, here are some aspects that a gender-just UCC could ensure.

Gender inclusivity and diversity in marriage

All family laws speak in gender binaries – man, woman, husband, wife, bridegroom, bride and so on. Those who identify themselves beyond these binaries, within the spectrum of trans and queer identities, are excluded from the pale of current family laws. They are deprived of a legal recognition of marriage and protection of their matrimonial rights, should they choose to be governed by such laws.

In a landmark judgment in 2019, the Madurai bench of the Madras high court directed the marriage registrar to register a marriage between a cis man and a transwoman, concluding that the term ‘bride’ in the Hindu Marriage Act connotes not only cis women but also trans women. Judgments such as in the Naz Foundation and Navtej Singh Johar cases have foregrounded the importance of self-determination of gender identity.

The bundle of petitions asking for same sex marriages to be recognised in family laws of India have had their final hearings in the Supreme Court and are awaiting judgment.

In May this year, the Supreme Court of Nepal directed the government to register same sex marriages. India could take inspiration from its neighbour. 

Broader definition of family

According to family laws in India, a ‘family’ consists of a couple and their minor or dependent children, towards whom they have responsibilities. In cases of a married woman, her husband’s parents are recognised as her family.

However, a heteronormative, monogamous family is a colonial concept that is highly incongruent with the varied forms of family and kinship that have traditionally and are currently in existence in India. These include maitri karaar in Gujarat, nata in Rajasthan, sambandham in Kerala, kareva or chaddar andazi in Haryana, dhuku in Jharkhand, Hijra gharanas, live-in relationships, chosen families and polyamory.

Thus ‘family’ needs to be broadened in tandem with ground realities.  

Age of marriage

The statutory age of marriage maybe set at 18 (on par with the age criteria for voting, and the recognised age of majority). The moot point is the consequence of violation of the age criteria. Given that a few years ago, it was reported that 84% of 12 million married children under 10 are Hindus, if all underaged marriages are declared void or legally invalid, such a move will have adverse consequences for all children and their rights within such marriages, particularly from the Hindu community.

Conversely, the concept of ‘option of puberty’ – originating from Muslim law and now incorporated in other laws – provides agency to the underaged party to the marriage to refuse to accept the marriage upon becoming a major.  

Agency in marriage and live-in relationships

Inter-religious, inter-caste, inter-class and same sex relationships are not only frowned upon and disapproved by the natal family; in many instances, there is collusion between the family, community leaders and vigilante groups, leading to “honour” crimes.

The law must recognise the agency and decisional autonomy of parties to marriage who have attained majority, without the need for any parental permission. The judiciary, through judgments in the cases of Arumugam Servai, Lata Singh, Shafin Jahan and Shakti Vahini, has reiterated the same. 

Live-in relationships have been recognised by the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA), 2005. Partners deciding to live together without the stamp of the law is a democratic exercise that state ought not to intervene with, using the ruse of Shraddha Walkar and Nikki Yadav cases. 

Status of children

There ought to be no differences in rights attributed to children born within a marriage or prolonged live-in relationships (considered legitimate), children born through transient relationships (considered illegitimate), adopted and surrogate children.

Children born in inter-caste, inter-religious or inter-class marriages should suffer no discrimination, in law or in reality. 

As suggested by the Law Commission in 2018, all children must be considered legitimate and entitled to inherit property from their parents. 

Guardianship and adoption

Where both parents are alive, they must both be given equal status as natural guardians, unlike the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, that recognises the father as the natural guardian, and after him, the mother. All parties must have an equal right to adoption. The right of single persons and persons in same sex relationships to adopt a child must be recognised, in tandem with the submission of the Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights to the Supreme Court.  This is because parenting depends on the capacity to and quality of care, not the gender or sexual orientation of the caregiver. 

Responsibilities towards parents

All children – biological, adopted and surrogate – irrespective of their gender – must have equal responsibilities towards ensuring the physical, financial and emotional well-being of parents, recognised in law. 

 Grounds of divorce

Fault grounds of divorce such as cruelty, desertion and adultery, as well as a divorce by mutual consent ought to be equally available to all parties to the marriage. In May 2023, the Supreme Court stated that it had the discretion to terminate a marriage that had broken down irretrievably, under Article 142(1) of the Indian constitution to do ‘complete justice’ to the parties. However, such a ground must be invoked with caution, after the issue of matrimonial property is settled and the wife’s economic interests secured.

Maintenance and alimony

Even though women must be encouraged to remain financially independent during the subsistence of marriage and upon its divorce, maintenance and alimony must be provided to the financially vulnerable party to the marriage or its dissolution.

Women’s unpaid housework and care work should be attributed a financial value and must be incorporated into the ascertainment of quantum of maintenance and alimony.  

Abolition of restitution of conjugal rights (RCR)

he RCR is a matrimonial remedy that compels parties to marriage to live together, in recognition of the aggrieved party’s conjugal rights. This remedy, of colonial origin, was incorporated into Hindu Marriage Act and found its way into family laws governing varied communities, though it was abolished in England in 1970. Though superficially, it applies equally to the parties to marriage, it has disproportionate and adverse consequences for women who may be at the receiving end of violence, raped and unwanted pregnancies.

As stated by Andhra Pradesh high court in T.Sareetha, the woman is stripped of bodily control and autonomy through a court order of RCR. A petition challenging the constitutional validity of this remedy remains pending before the Supreme Court, but the government, in its wisdom, ought to exclude this provision in any proposed UCC, as it is inconsistent with the constitutionally guaranteed fundamental right to life with dignity.

Recognition of concept of matrimonial property

Upon the divorce or death of a party to marriage, an equitable distribution of assets acquired by parties during the subsistence of the marriage, is of prime importance. Such property maybe in the name of the earning party to the marriage, but the theory of social reproduction tells us that the contribution of non-earning party to the home facilitates such an acquisition.

No family law squarely addresses this issue, except in Goa, where too, the rights on paper are at variance with lived experiences of women. If the government is committed to gender equality within the family, it must make provisions for a matrimonial property regime. 

Transfer of property by a will

In many northern and western societies, daughters are routinely compelled to sign away their ancestral property rights in favour of their brothers, through relinquishment deeds (referred to as ‘haq tyaag’ in Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan). Such patriarchal social norms neutralise and defeat legal provisions of equal property rights to daughters.

Taking a leaf from Muslim law, which prescribes that not more than one-third of the property can be willed away, the Law Commission, in 2018, recommended that all family laws prescribe a portion that must be kept aside for dependants of the deceased person, and that the entire property cannot be willed away. The Commission also noted that persons with disabilities, especially women, are denied right to inheritance directly (excluded from wills) or indirectly (not given their share of property), which must be countered by law. 

Distribution of property when there is no will

The scheme of intestate succession (when a person owns property and dies without making a valid will) is vastly different under each family law. As suggested by the LCI in 2018, based on the rule of proximity (nearness) in relation to the deceased, the scheme could be classified as follows: 

Class 1 – spouse, children, children of pre-deceased children and parents of the deceased.

Class 2 – siblings, children of siblings (if the sibling is not alive) and grandparents.

Class 3 – other relatives.

All surviving Class 1 heirs would take the property entirely among them with one share each; the property would devolve on Class 2 heirs only if no Class 1 heir exists. And on Class 3 if no Class 2 heirs are alive.  This scheme should be gender neutral, and treat biological, adopted and surrogate children on par, and make no distinction between legitimate and illegitimate children.

The above list is not exhaustive, but indicative.

If we are to believe that the government has finally woken up from its slumber (just in time for the 2024 general elections), and is now determined to enact a UCC, we are in a position to decide on supporting it only when we know its contents. 

While it is not easy to believe in the bona fides of a government that ignored the Law Commission’s call for gender-just reforms in family laws for five long years (2018-2023), a wish list of what a gender-just UCC could consist of has the potential to concretise and ground the discussions on UCC. 

We have the responsibility to analyse the Uttarakhand UCC Bill that has just been announced (on June 30, 2023), and determine what course corrections are required for a national one, if at all.

Dr. Saumya Uma is a Professor at Jindal Global Law School, O.P. Jindal Global University, and heads its Centre for Women’s Rights. She teaches, writes and speaks at the intersections of gender, human rights and the law. The opinions expressed in this article are her own. 

Also read: BJP’s Clamour for Uniform Civil Code Driven by Aim of Dividing, Not Uniting, Indians

UCC - Narendra Modi Knows an Actual UCC Will Be an Electoral Disaster for Him

 Narendra Modi Knows an Actual UCC Will Be an Electoral Disaster for Him

Who will it be uniform for? The chronology is clear as Hindus would want out too. The BJP realises this and hence, there is no UCC draft being made available, just hot air.

Narendra Modi Knows an Actual UCC Will Be an Electoral Disaster for Him

Illustration: Pariplab Chakraborty

16/JUL/2023

Will all cousins be allowed to marry, or nieces their maternal uncles? Or will that be banned for all in the new Uniform Civil Code (UCC), including those communities currently exempted from the Hindu Marriage Act’s ban on ‘sapinda’ marriages? Will we all have to follow Christian family law when we wish to divorce? Will rules from the Muslim personal code apply as regards inheritance and sharing of property with parents if one dies intestate or perhaps, Parsi rules? Will everyone be allowed to avail of the attractive tax benefits of the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF)? Or will that be abolished for all, uniformly? Will all Indians be forced to follow Santhal customs? Or Naga ones? (By the way, even the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 does not apply to Nagaland).

Nothing is known as there is no publicly available draft of a UCC being talked up by the BJP. What we know is that the Modi government dislikes diversity and sees diverse practices as a threat to the Indian Union. It said so in its affidavit to the Supreme Court in October 2022, in response to a petition on the UCC. The Union government said that citizens belonging to different religions and denominations adhering to different property and matrimonial laws was an “affront to the nation’s unity”. Prime Minister Narendra Modi last month too referred to “separate laws for separate communities” and said that the country could not run on a dual system. Oddly, this was not in some meeting or address on the subject, but while addressing booth-level workers of the BJP in Bhopal. It is clearly in an electoral context that the UCC is being referred to.

But this is where the catch is. The BJP may be picking on an electorally indigestible bone. The fact is that attempts to suddenly spring a UCC on all Hindus too would be a disaster. Maybe that is why there is no draft. In Uttarakhand, for example, where a committee has been constituted by the BJP state government under Justice (retd) Ranjana Desai, to work one out for the state, there have been 13 months of consultations, 38 public meetings, but no report yet.

The emphasis is on uniformity and not progressive or better or emancipatory. So, what or whose laws will be imposed on the whole nation?

Directive or principle?

While Article 44 of the Constitution – contained in Part IV, i.e. the Directive Principles of State Policy – speaks of a UCC, it is non-justiciable and just an ideal objective. The Directive Principles (Article 36 to 51) are violated with impunity and often by the state on a daily basis. Consider just Article 43A, on the same page as the UCC, which reads, “The State shall take steps, by suitable legislation or in any other way, to secure the participation of workers in the management of undertakings, establishments or other organisations engaged in any industry.”

Coming back to Article 44, Dr B.R. Ambedkar had, in November 1948, envisaged a way around it: that a voluntary offer may be the way of bringing a consensus on such wide-ranging practices; “a provision by way of making a beginning that the Code shall apply only to those who make a declaration that they are prepared to be bound by it, so that in the initial stage the application of the Code may be purely voluntary […] so that the fear which my friends have expressed here will be altogether nullified.”

In fact, there already is a Special Marriage Act, 1954, providing a legal umbrella for inter-religious, inter-caste marriages. In The Intimate State, Perveez Mody has studied the “protections (and obstructions) presented by the law to those who transform their new forms of intimacy into marriage in the eyes of the state”. A true progressive approach would be to expand the legal limits of how ‘relations of intimacy’ and the ‘family’ are thought of, ideally to break caste endogamy and perhaps even annihilate caste. India needs a civil code that is uniformly progressive, rather than uniformly regressive.

The BJP’s target may be Muslim but enough groups which are parts of the party’s electoral calculus – i.e. tribals, Goans, people in the north-eastern states, Sikhs, Parsis and Christians – have made their case and already want out of an unknown uniformity being sought to be imposed. This opposition will spell disaster for the BJP if it pursues the matter in an election year. Maybe that explains the chronology of Union home minister Amit Shah having assured a 12-member Nagaland government delegation, led by chief minister Neiphiu Rio, that the government is considering exempting Christians and some pockets of tribal areas from the scope of the proposed contentious UCC. The state government of Nagaland actually said so in an official press release on July 7. So, Schedule Six, the box for exceptions is already being carved up. Article 371 (A to J) mandates exceptions for regions and persons. So, once it is decided that there is a ‘uniform’, who will be exempted and who won’t?

Mechanics of it

The Law Commission is being relied upon as the nodal body to work on the UCC to prepare something the BJP wants. But the Law Commission has already said clearly in para 1.15 of a detailed report in 2018 that a UCC was “neither necessary nor desirable”. To cite the full sentence, “This Commission has therefore dealt with laws that are discriminatory rather than providing a uniform civil code which is neither necessary nor desirable at this stage. Most countries are now moving towards recognition of difference, and the mere existence of difference does not imply discrimination, but is indicative of a robust democracy.” That is completely at variance with the ‘one size fits all’ being sought by a majoritarian government.

How much the BJP government cares for the sanctity of the Law Commission is clear from at least two facts.

First, it is disregarding the recommendations of its own appointees in the 21st Law Commission from 2018 saying the UCC is a no go and personal laws should just be urged to evolve out of bad practices.

Secondly, this government did not bother to appoint members to the 22nd Law Commission for years. The 22nd Law Commission was a ghost commission for nearly all of its three-year term. Notified on February 21, 2020, it was kept vacant for two years and nine months of its three-year term. A chairperson, Justice Rituraj Awasthi (retd), finally assumed office on November 9, 2022. Its term has now been extended till August, 2024.

When the 21st Law Commission put forth its questionnaire in the public domain in November 2016, it received over 75,378 responses. This time, the 22nd Law Commission has to deal with 46 lakh responses. What is the process for sifting through this? What is the process of reinventing the UCC wheel? Nothing is known.

Progressive civil code

In 2017, a citizen’s group comprising activist Bezwada Wilson, lawyer Dushyant, actor Gul Panag, academic and author Mukul Kesavan, author Nilanjana Roy, scholar S. Irfan Habib, Major General S. Vombetkere (retd) and musician T.M. Krishna presented a proposal of a model progressive Uniform Civil Code (UCC) to Justice B.S. Chauhan, chairman of the Law Commission. 

They conceived of the abolition of the HUF, gender-neutral marriage and inheritance laws, which would entitle all children – biological, adopted, surrogate, ‘legitimate’ and ‘illegitimate’ – to inherit property. In a supporting letter, former attorney general Soli J. Sorabjee, who forwarded the draft code to Justice Chauhan, said, “I want to join those who wish to ensure that any step ahead to bring everyone on the same page must be progressive and enlightened.” Sorabjee added that the Law Commissions recommendations on a UCC should be “far-sighted and progressive”.

The root of the problem is how Modi and his government view diversity. A good talking point for foreign trips, it came up in Paris too on Thursday. But it is an “affront to the nation’s unity” for domestic business.

Like the many species of flora and fauna in the Amazon forest, the diversity of India is a fact. But inclusiveness or wanting a healthy and plural pastiche is an act, which speaks to what a society wants to do with its diversity. As a modern democracy in 1950, India was anxious to embrace it. The same cannot be said for India 75 years on.

Also read: BJP Equates UCC With Gender Justice. But Can It End Discrimination In-Built in Personal Laws?

The problem with wanting a UCC is the obsession with the ‘U’. 2023 calls for a Progressive or a P, a PCC. But a majoritarian BJP is keen on just clinging onto anything it hopes will fire its base. It is evident that the purpose is to indulge in performative exclusion, in this case, to tell its base that it has obliterated Muslim Personal Law.

The BJP would also like to say it has been able to impose the ‘uniformity’ of Hindu Law but there is no one Hindu law which will be acceptable across the country to all Hindus and non-Hindus (i.e., not just Muslims but Christians, Parsis, Tribals, Sikhs etc.) Any exercise that dives into the details, even if a stitched-up quickie Code, will be a Pandora’s box, full of elements unacceptable to everyone concerned.

Hence the UCC as a concrete proposal is AWOL. Try persuading any Hindu family in the PM’s constituency in UP that it is ok to marry a mama or first-cousin. And try persuading a Hindu family in the external affairs minister’s home state of Tamil Nadu to stop doing that.

UCC - Will Strip the Marginalised of Their Constitutional Protections

 A Uniform Civil Code Will Strip the Marginalised of Their Constitutional Protections

The announcement of a UCC is a brazen attack on the protective provisions inherent in the Constitution for religious minorities and cultural groups such as tribes.

GOVERNMENTLAWRIGHTS

17/JUL/2023

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) as an agenda for legislation has surfaced again in the national discourse. The underlying idea driving this agenda is premised on the cause of gender equality, an important issue of concern that needs attention. The idea of equality generally is embodied in the concept of citizenship. However, the drive to equality has two dimensions. One refers to equality before the law or equal treatment to all before the law. Such a notion of equality does not necessarily lead to equality of opportunity, given the inequality inherent in the societal structure. After all, individuals with the status of citizenship are not outside of the communities – be they linguistic, religious, social or cultural. India epitomises this.

India is not a homogenous society with everyone speaking the same language and practising the same religion, traditions and customs, as is the case of many European countries. Rather, the opposite is true, leading to differences among its people concerning their personal life. Over and above, the communities so located are marked off by certain structures of inequality in the sphere of economy, polity and demography, with implications for unequal relations among individuals. While some communities stand privileged, others suffer disadvantages along one or more such parameters. Of the disadvantaged along community lines, language, religion, caste and tribe have generally been identified as the key criterion.

Where protection exists – and where it doesn’t

The framers of the Indian Constitution recognised the diversity and its intricate interface with varied dimensions of inequality. They were acutely aware that societies marked by diversity (linguistic and religious) are hardly on the same plane either in demographic terms or others such as development or a combination of both. They recognised that equality before law does not necessarily guarantee the equality of a level playing field. It is with this end in mind that the Indian Constitution laid down protective provisions for certain groups and communities alongside the fundamental rights to freedom, equality and justice for every citizen in the country. The most talked about of such protective provisions has been the representation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes through reservation in state employment, state-run higher educational institutions and political institutions such as the parliament, state legislature and even local self-governing institutions following the 73rd and 74th amendments in 1992. Such protective provisions have been positive steps toward the realisation of equality.

There are also, however, protective provisions of other kinds which aim at safeguarding the identity and interests of religiously, linguistically and culturally disadvantaged groups that emanate from their being a numerical minority. This is best illustrated in provisions under Articles 29(1) and 30(1) meant for minorities and Articles 244(1) and 244(2) providing for the 5th and 6th schedules of the Constitution, as well as Articles 371A and 371G for Nagaland and Mizoram, respectively. In the protection of such provisions, however, the state has hardly provided or taken any concrete positive measures (excepting areas under the 6th schedule and with special constitutional status) to secure and safeguard their identity and interest – be it language, religion and, in the case of tribes, even land and forest.

Most tribes have their language but in the absence of any positive measures to protect and promote their language via school curriculum or other related measures, many tribal languages have become extinct, and many are already in the process. And so has been the case with tribal indigenous/traditional religions. Rather than recognising their distinct religious identity, these beliefs are being erased through the state administrative practice of co-option into the Hindu religious identity. The assertion for recognition of their distinct religious identity and their separate enumeration in the census today in different parts of India is a part of the process of reclaiming the above identity.

All these have been the result of the uniformisation of laws, policies and practices initiated from time to time, either by the Central or state governments. The violation of the provision inherent in the 5th schedule of the Constitution is the best example. Article 5(1) states that notwithstanding anything in the Constitution, the governor may by public notification direct that any particular Act of the parliament or the state legislature shall not apply to a scheduled area or any part thereof in the state or shall apply subject to such exceptions and modifications as he may specify in the notification or any direction given under this sub-paragraph may be given to have retrospective effect. Yet all through post-independence India, governors never applied this power conferred on them to secure tribal interest and welfare. Rather, every law passed by the parliament and the state legislature was applied in scheduled areas with far-reaching consequences on their land, forest and livelihood, paving the way for the poorest social development indicators in India.

The scenario in 6th schedule areas and states with special constitutional status in the form of Articles 371A and 371G is quite the opposite in all respects such as land, forest, language, customs and traditions, as the Constitution has given these areas a built-in institutional structure in the form of the Autonomous District Councils under the 6th schedule and states with special constitutional status to safeguard and promote their interests and identity. Further, unlike in the 5th schedule areas where the applicability of laws passed by parliament and state legislatures was vested in the office of the governor and his discretion which has hardly been used, the parliament- and state-enacted legislature concerned with subjects under the 6th schedule provision were not applicable in the 6th schedule areas. And so has been the case with parliament-enacted legislature on issues concerning social, religious and cultural practices in states with special constitutional status.

UCC is an attack on constitutional provisions

The announcement of a UCC is a brazen attack on the protective provisions inherent in the Constitution for religious minorities and cultural groups such as tribes. Moreover, in addition to being linguistic minorities, tribes also form religious minorities, both as Christians and practitioners of traditional/indigenous religions. Furthermore, tribal customary law, the font of personal law for tribal communities, has no religious moorings. For example, much of the personal life among tribal Christians is governed more by local tribal customs than religion, except for sacramental issues.

The UCC poses challenges to such provisions inherent in the Constitution. In fact, it comes in direct conflict with the provisions of the 6th schedule of the Constitution existing in Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Tripura. The same is the case for the states of Nagaland and Mizoram with special constitutional status of 371A and 371G, respectively. In both cases, the UCC violates constitutional provisions.

In the case of the 5th schedule, it can prevail as the governors, as mentioned earlier, have never used the power vested in them in the Constitution to secure and safeguard tribal interests and identity. The UCC may now, however, fall into legal entanglement while contending with the Provisions of the Panchayat Extension to Scheduled Areas (PESA) Act 1996. Provision 4(a) of the Act unequivocally states that any state Act introduced in PESA shall be in accordance with the customary law, social and religious practices and traditional management practices of community resources.

Why these protections are important

Such protective provisions have been part of the larger design to address the issue of inequality not in the form of equality before the law but equal chances and conditions for the minority groups to practice and maintain their distinct social, religious and customary practices. This had taken the form of personal law in the case of religious minorities and the customary social and cultural practices in the case of tribes. In doing so, the Constitution had made a space for legal pluralism as a step towards celebrating diversity and thereby facilitating the maintenance of their distinct identity. After all, in a society where they form a numerical minority plus economically and socially disadvantaged, these ensured protective provisions or mechanisms for minorities to have equal footing toward maintaining their identity, interest, and ways of life.

In the absence of such provisions, it may have been difficult for them to preserve and maintain their distinct identity as a minority in the country. Hence the Constitution equips them with constitutional protectionism. Yet while conferring citizenship rights in the form of equality before the law, such laws alone would have been unfair for vulnerable segments of society if special provisions were not made for them in the form of certain protective measures.  Thus, the protective measures were a provision toward the realisation of what may be called “equality in conditions to ensure equality outcomes”.

At the same time, such provisions pose the problem of citizenship in the sense of equal rights of the individuals within such groups and communities. This is most evident in gender inequality, which needs consideration and attention. However, the UCC is not the best of such means to achieve gender equality. The celebration of protective provisions enshrined in the Constitution is as important as the equality of individuals before the law as the UCC aims to achieve.

Unfortunately, the ethos and spirit of other protective provisions have not been adequately discussed and deliberated beyond the policy of reservation. Violating the protective laws by the general laws and policies in the name of equality or public good/public purpose outwits the provision of equal conditions or start points provided in the Constitution for the marginalised and vulnerable. Often this is also discussed in the form of equality of outcome.

The founding fathers of the Constitution were acutely aware of this denial of equality in respect of religious and cultural minorities and hence made provisions for protective provisions in the Constitution. Such provisions in the constitution have been an aspect of celebration in the writings of legal luminaries and social scientists in the 1960s and ’70s. However, the emergence of women’s and gender issues that dominated the academic and civil, and political space since the 1980s led to much criticism of religious and cultural diversity on account of gender inequality overlooking the fact of other forms of marginality.

Gender inequality is indeed imperative and should be pursued but probably it needs to be carefully thought through and calibrated as an agenda for social inclusion and gender justice rather than as a one-size-fits-all approach by introducing the UCC.

Virginius Xaxa is currently visiting professor at the Institute for Human Development (IHD), New Delhi. Prior to joining IHD, he was Professor of Eminence and Bharat Ratna Lokapriya Gopinath Bordoloi Chair at Tezpur University (2016–2018). He was also Professor and Deputy Director of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Guwahati Campus (2011–2016). He taught Sociology at the Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi (1990–2011), and North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong (1978–1990). 

Telangana Armed Struggle : Avadhish Rani : అప్పట్లో మా కోడ్‌... పాల్‌రాప్సన్‌

 Avadhish Rani : అప్పట్లో మా కోడ్‌... పాల్‌రాప్సన్‌

ABN , First Publish Date - 2023-09-17T05:34:20+05:30 IST

తెలంగాణ సాయుధ రైతాంగ పోరాటంలో కొరియర్‌గా సేవలందించారు అవ్‌ధీశ్‌ రాణి. ఆమె ప్రముఖ స్వాతంత్య్ర సమరయోధుడు రాజ్‌ బహదూర్‌ గౌర్‌కు చెల్లెలు కూడా. హైదరాబాద్‌ రాష్ట్రం భారతదేశంలో విలీనమై 75 ఏళ్లు పూర్తి అవుతున్న సందర్భంగా...

Avadhish Rani  : అప్పట్లో మా కోడ్‌... పాల్‌రాప్సన్‌

తెలంగాణ సాయుధ రైతాంగ పోరాటంలో కొరియర్‌గా సేవలందించారు అవ్‌ధీశ్‌ రాణి.

Pause

Unmute

Remaining Time -4:04

Close Player

ఆమె ప్రముఖ స్వాతంత్య్ర సమరయోధుడు రాజ్‌ బహదూర్‌ గౌర్‌కు చెల్లెలు కూడా. హైదరాబాద్‌ రాష్ట్రం భారతదేశంలో విలీనమై 75 ఏళ్లు పూర్తి అవుతున్న సందర్భంగా... ప్రపంచంలోనే మహత్తరమైన

ఆ పోరాట చరిత్రకు ప్రత్యక్ష సాక్షిగా... ఆనాటి జ్ఞాపకాలను అవధీశ్‌ రాణి ‘నవ్య’తో చెబుతున్నారిలా.!

‘‘అది 1948 సెప్టెంబరు17. సమయం సాయంత్రం 5 గంటలు. హైదరాబాద్‌ గౌలీపురాలోని మా గల్లీ అంతా జనంతో కిక్కిరిసింది. అక్కడ అంతమంది గుమిగూడినా... గుండుసూది కిందపడినా వినిపించేంతటి నిశ్శబ్దం. వారందరి దృష్టి మా ఇంటి గుమ్మానికి వేలాడదీసిన రేడియో మీదే ఉంది. అప్పుడు నా వయసు ఎనిమిదేళ్లు. ‘‘ఆసఫ్‌జాహీ వంశానికి చిహ్నమైన కరవాలాన్ని జనరల్‌ ఛౌధురికి ఏడో నిజాం కుమారుడు ఆజం జా అప్పగించారు. హైదరాబాద్‌ రాజ్యం భారతదేశంలో విలీనమైంది’’ అంటూ ‘దక్కన్‌ రేడియో’ ప్రయోక్త జఫ్రూల్‌ హసన్‌ ఉర్దూలో ప్రకటించారు. ఆ వెంటనే జ్యోతికా రాయ్‌ పాడిన ‘పగ్‌ ఘున్‌గ్రూ బంధ్‌ మీరా’ అనే మీరాబాయి భజన్‌ ప్రసారం చేసినట్టు నాకు బాగా గుర్తు. ఆ తర్వాత జఫ్రూల్‌ పాకిస్తాన్‌లో స్థిరపడినా... ప్రముఖ కవి మగ్దూం చనిపోయినప్పుడు ఇక్కడికి వచ్చారు. అప్పుడు ఆయనను కలిశాను కూడా. మా అన్నయ్య రాజ్‌ బహదూర్‌గౌర్‌ వల్ల నేనూ తెలంగాణ సాయుధ రైతాంగ పోరాటానికి నా వంతు సహకారం అందించాను. ‘కామ్రేడ్స్‌ అసోసియేషన్‌’ స్థాపకుడిలో అన్నయ్య కూడా ఒకరు. కాబట్టి జావేద్‌ రిజ్వీ, మగ్దూం మొహియుద్దీన్‌, రావి నారాయణరెడ్డి, బద్దం ఎల్లారెడ్డి లాంటి కమ్యూనిస్టు నాయకులంతా మా ఇంటికి తరచూ వచ్చేవారు.

పోలీసును అడ్డుకున్నా...

చిన్నవయసులోనే పీసీ జోషీ, డాంగే, అజయ్‌ఘోష్‌, పుచ్చలపల్లి సుందరయ్య, చండ్ర రాజేశ్వరరావు లాంటి పెద్దనాయకులను ఎన్నో సార్లు కలిశాను. అలాంటి మహనీయులను చూస్తూ, మగ్దూం కవితాలాపన వింటూ పెరిగాను. నా బాల్యజ్ఞాపకం అంటే... 1947, దీపావళి. ఆ రోజు జావేద్‌ రజ్వీ, మగ్దూంతో పాటు ఇంకొందరు కార్యకర్తలు రహస్యంగా మా ఇంటికి భోజనానికి వచ్చారు. వాళ్లు ఉన్న గదిలోకి ఇతరులు వెళ్లకుండా నన్ను కాపలా ఉంచారు. సరిగ్గా అదే సమయానికి కిషన్‌లాల్‌ అనే పోలీసు అధికారి కూడా వచ్చారు. అతను మాకు దగ్గర బంధువు కూడా. ఆ మిషతో అన్నయ్యా వాళ్ల కదలికలు తెలుసుకోవాలనే ఉద్దేశంతో అప్పుడప్పుడు ఇంటికి వస్తుండేవారు. ఆ పోలీసు నేరుగా జావేద్‌ వాళ్లు ఉన్నగది వైపు వెళుతుంటే... ‘’అక్కడ ఆడవాళ్లంతా లక్ష్మీపూజలో ఉన్నారు. వెళ్లొద్దు’’ అన్నాను. అంతే... నా చెంప మీద ఛెళ్లుమనిపించాడు. దాంతో నాకు కోపం వచ్చి ఆయన మీద తిరగబడ్డాను. రక్కుతూ... కుర్తా చింపి గొడవ చేయడంతో ఆ పోలీసు వెళ్లిపోయారు. ఒకవేళ గదిలో మా అన్నయ్య కనుక ఉంటే ఏడుస్తూ వెళ్లి చెబుతా కదా! కనుక వాళ్లు లోపల ఉన్నారా? లేరా; అని నిర్ధారించుకోవడం కోసం ఆ రోజు నన్ను కొట్టినట్లు ఇరవై ఏళ్ల తర్వాత కిషన్‌లాల్‌ అంకులే నాకు స్వయంగా చెప్పారు.

అప్పుడు అదే మా కోడ్‌...

అజ్ఞాతంలోని పోరాట యోధులకు సమాచారాన్ని బట్వాడా చేయడం భోజనాలు తీసుకెళ్లడం లాంటి బాధ్యతల్లోనూ చాలా చురుగ్గా పాల్గొన్నాను. ‘ఫలానా చోటుకు భోజనం తీసుకురావాలి’ అని కార్యకర్తలు ముందురోజు రాత్రి కాగితం రాసి మా ఇంటి దర్వాజా సందులో విసిరేసేవాళ్లు. అది చూసి, మా అమ్మా వాళ్లూ రొట్టెలు, పరోటాలు, ఆలుసబ్జీ లాంటివన్నీ వండి, సంచుల్లో మూటగట్టి నాకు ఇచ్చేవారు. దాన్ని భుజాన వేసుకొని వాళ్లు చెప్పిన ప్రదేశానికి తీసుకెళ్లేదాన్ని. ‘పాల్‌రాప్సన్‌’ అనేది మా కోడ్‌. అక్కడికి వెళ్లాక ‘పాల్‌రాప్సన్‌’ అంటూ నేను పాటపాడితే, అవతలి వ్యక్తి వచ్చి మెల్లగా ‘పాల్‌ రాప్సన్‌’ అంటాడు. అప్పుడు అతనికి భోజనం సంచిని, ఇంకా ఏమైనా కాగితాలు ఇస్తే వాటిని అందజేసేదాన్ని. అలా చాలాసార్లు గౌలీపురా నుంచి రెండు కిలోమీటర్ల దూరంలోని లలితాబాగ్‌ అమ్మవారి దేవాలయం వరకు నడుచుకుంటూ వెళ్లేదాన్ని. అలా పోలీసుల కంట పడకుండా జాగ్రత్తగా అజ్ఞాతంలోని స్వాతంత్య్ర సమరయోధులకు కొరియర్‌గా వ్యవహరించాను. తెలంగాణ సాయుధ పోరాటంలో నేనూ భాగమైనందుకు గర్విస్తున్నాను.

మతాంతర వివాహాలు...

గౌర్‌ అన్నయ్య ముషీరాబాద్‌ జైల్లో ఉన్నప్పుడు నేను రెండుసార్లు ములాఖత్‌కు వెళ్లి కలిశాను. అప్పుడు మరో స్వాతంత్య్ర సమరయోధుడు కేఎల్‌ మహేంద్రకు ఇవ్వమని అన్నయ్య రహస్యంగా నాకు ఒక కాగితం ఇచ్చారు. దాన్ని నేను ఎవరి కంటా పడకుండా షూలో పెట్టుకొని తెచ్చి ఆయనకు ఇచ్చాను. మా వదిన బ్రిజ్‌రాణి గౌర్‌కూడా ఏడాది జైల్లో ఉంది. ఆమె చెల్లెలు రేణుకను ‘కామ్రేడ్స్‌ అసోసియేషన్‌’ వ్యవస్థాపకుల్లో ఒకరైన జావేద్‌ రజ్వీ వివాహమాడారు. ఆ సమయంలో కమ్యూనిస్టు పార్టీ ప్రభావంతో చాలామంది కులాంతర వివాహాలు, మతాంతర వివాహాలు చేసుకున్నారు. అలా పాతనగరంలోని కొన్ని హిందూ- ముస్లిం కుటుంబాల మధ్య బంధుత్వాలు కలిశాయి. అదే ఇప్పుడు జరిగితే, దాన్ని ‘లవ్‌ జీహాదీ’ అని కొందరు గగ్గోలు పెడతారేమో! ఒకసారి ఏమైందంటే... ‘హిందూ అమ్మాయిని ముస్లిం అబ్బాయి పెళ్లాడాడు’ అని మా బంధువులామె పెదవి విరుస్తూ మా నాయనమ్మతో చెప్పింది. అప్పుడు మా నాయనమ్మ ఏమన్నదో తెలుసా? ‘‘అబ్బాయి, అమ్మాయే కదా షాదీ చేసుకుంది. అబ్బాయిని అబ్బాయి లేదంటే అమ్మాయిని అమ్మాయి పెళ్లాడలేదు కదా! నీకెందుకు బాధ’’ అన్నది. ఇవాళ చదువుకున్న యువత ఈ మాత్రం కూడా ఆలోచించలేకపోతున్నందుకు బాధేస్తుంటుంది.

వాళ్ల సహకారం లేకుంటే...

గౌలీపురా కమాన్‌ దగ్గర రోజూ ఉదయం కొంతమంది రజాకార్లు మార్చ్‌ ఫాస్ట్‌ చేసేవాళ్లు. అది అయిపోయాక, వాళ్ల బృందంలోని ఎల్లయ్య, మల్లన్న అని ఇద్దరు మా ఇంటికొచ్చి మంచినీళ్లు, చాయ్‌ తీసుకెళ్లేవారు. వాళ్లను చూశాకే తెలిసింది... రజాకార్లలో కొందరు హిందువులు కూడా ఉన్నారని! ఆర్థిక ఇబ్బందులు భరించలేని వాళ్లు చాలామంది ఉపాధి మార్గంగా రజాకార్లలో చేరారు. అంతేకానీ నిజాం మీద ప్రేమతో కాదు. రజాకార్‌గా మారినందుకు సొంత తమ్ముడిని ఇంట్లో నుంచి వెళ్లగొట్టాడు మా పక్కింటి మంజిల్‌ మియా. ‘సియాసత్‌’ వ్యవస్థాపకుడు అబిద్‌ అలీఖాన్‌కు సహాధ్యాయి అయిన మహబూబ్‌ హుస్సేన్‌ జిగార్‌ కూడా రజాకార్‌ సైన్యంలో చేరిన తన తమ్ముడు ఇబ్రహీంను కుటుంబం నుంచి వెలి వేశాడు. దాంతో కళ్లు తెరిచిన ఇబ్రహీం తర్వాత కాలంలో పాకిస్తాన్‌లో కమ్యూనిస్టు పార్టీ నిర్మాణం కోసం పనిచేశాడు. అబిద్‌ హాసన్‌ సఫ్రానీ మేనల్లుడు హసన్‌ నాసర్‌ సైతం పాక్‌లో సామ్యవాద సిద్ధాంతాన్ని ప్రచారం చేసేందుకు జీవితాన్ని త్యాగం చేశాడు. మారూఫ్‌ అనే ఆయుధాల వ్యాపారి, వస్త్ర దుకాణదారుడు మహ్మద్‌ అలీ, జమీందారీ బిడ్డ ఎంకే మోయినుద్దీన్‌.... ఇలా ఒకరు కాదు, ఇద్దరు కాదు... ఎంతోమంది ముస్లింలు తెలంగాణ సాయుధ పోరాట యోధులకు సహాయ సహకారాలు అందించారు. చాలామంది నిజాం రాచరికానికి వ్యతిరేకంగా నేరుగా ఉద్యమించారు. అందుకు నేను ప్రత్యక్ష సాక్షిని. ఆనాటి పాతనగరంలోని మధ్యతరగతి ముస్లిం కుటుంబాల అండదండలు లేకుంటే అసలు తెలంగాణ సాయుధ పోరాటం ముందుకు సాగేదే కాదు. ముఖ్యంగా జమాలున్నీసా బేగం, రజియా బేగం, మునీర్‌ ఆపా... ఇలా ముస్లిం మహిళలు ఎంతోమంది నిజాం నియంతృత్వాన్ని నిరసించారు. తెలంగాణ సాయుధ రైతాంగ పోరాటంలో వీర వనితలుగా నిలిచారు. ఇప్పటికీ వారందరి కుటుంబాలతో నా స్నేహం కొనసాగుతోంది.’’

నిజాం కాలేజీలో...

అఖిల భారత విద్యార్థి సమాఖ్య అధ్యక్షుడు రఫీ అహ్మద్‌ 1947, ఆగస్టు 15 తెల్లవారు జామున నిజాం కాలేజీలోని తరగతి గది బయట భారత జాతీయ జెండాను ఎగరేశాడు. అతణ్ణి నిజాం పోలీసులు వెంబడించారు. వారినుంచి తప్పించుకొని నేరుగా మా ఇంటికి వచ్చి, ఆ సంగతులు అన్నయ్యతో చెబుతుండగా విన్నాను. అలా నాకు తెలిసి హైదరాబాద్‌ నగరంలో మొట్టమొదట మువ్వన్నెల పతాకాన్ని ఆవిష్కరించింది రఫీ అహ్మద్‌ అని అనుకుంటున్నా!

ఇదీ నా జీవితం...

మాది ఉత్తరప్రదేశ్‌కు చెందిన కాయస్థ కుటుంబం. మా తాతయ్య వ్యాపారరీత్యా 150 ఏళ్ల కిందట హైదరాబాద్‌లో స్థిరపడ్డారు. అలా మేమంతా ఇక్కడే పుట్టి పెరిగాం. మా అన్నయ్య డాక్టర్‌ రాజ్‌ బహదూర్‌ గౌర్‌ ప్రభావంతో నేనూ చిన్ననాటి నుంచి కమ్యూనిస్టు పార్టీ అభిమానిగా మారాను. ఫస్ట్‌ క్లాస్‌ నుంచి పీహెచ్‌డీ వరకు నా చదువంతా ఉర్దూలోనే సాగింది. నా ఉద్యోగ జీవితం... డిగ్రీ కళాశాల అధ్యాపకురాలిగా మొదలై ఎన్‌సిఈఆర్‌టి ఉర్దూ పాఠ్యపుస్తకాల రూపకల్పన చేసే స్థాయి వరకు కొనసాగింది. చరిత్రకారుడు, సీనియర్‌ ఐఏఎస్‌ వసంతకుమార్‌ బావ ‘లాస్ట్‌ నిజాం’ పుస్తక రచన సమయంలో... ‘తెలుగు, ఉర్దూ భాషల మీద పట్టున్న వ్యక్తి కావాలి’ అని ఎవరినో అడిగితే, వారు నా పేరు సూచించారట! అలా నేను ఆయనకు పరిచయం అయ్యాను. ‘బండెనక బండి కట్టి...’ లాంటి తెలుగు పాటలను, మరికొంత ఉర్దూ సమాచారాన్ని ఇంగ్లీషులో అనువదించడం లాంటి పనులతో ఆయన పుస్తక రచనలో పరోక్షంగా భాగస్వామినయ్యాను. తర్వాత ఓ రోజు నన్ను ఇష్టపడుతున్నట్టు మా అన్నయ్యతో వసంత్‌ చెప్పారట. ‘‘ఆ విషయం అవ్‌ధీశ్‌తోనే చెప్పు’’ అని అన్నయ్య అనడంతో... తన మనసులో మాటను వసంత్‌ నా ముందు ఉంచారు. ‘‘మీరు పంజాబీ క్రిస్టియన్‌. నేను కమ్యూనిస్టు పార్టీ సానుభూతిపరురాలిని. మరి కుదురుతుందా?’’ అని ఆయనను అడిగాను. తనకేమీ అభ్యంతరం లేదన్నారు. బాగా ఆలోచించి, రెండేళ్ల తర్వాత అంటే, 1991లో ‘ఓకే’ చెప్పాను. మా వివాహ సమయంలో ఆయన వయసు 63, నా వయసు 53. మా ఇద్దరి మతాలు వేరైనా, దృక్పథాలు భిన్నమైనా ఎన్నడూ మా మధ్య కలతలు తలెత్తలేదు. అన్యోన్యంగా కలిసి బతికాం. వసంత్‌ సహచర్యంతో ఇన్నాళ్లు నా జీవితం చాలా ఆనందంగా సాగింది. ఇప్పుడు ఆయన జ్ఞాపకాలే మిగిలాయి. హైదరాబాద్‌ చరిత్రను రికార్డు చేసిన అతికొద్దిమందిలో వసంత్‌కుమార్‌ బావ ఒకరు. వారసత్వ కట్టడాల పరిరక్షణ, పర్యావరణ ఉద్యమాలకు అంకితమై పనిచేశారు. ఆయన మరణానంతరం వసంత్‌ వ్యక్తిగత గ్రంథాలయంలోని పదివేల పుస్తకాలను మౌలానా ఆజాద్‌ నేషనల్‌ ఉర్దూ వర్సిటీకి ఇచ్చాను.

కె. వెంకటేశ్‌

ఫొటోలు: ఆర్‌.రాజ్‌కుమార్‌

Telangana Armed Struggle - Muslims

 ముస్లిం వ్యతిరేక కథనాలతో వాస్తవాలకు మసి!

ABN , First Publish Date - 2023-09-16T03:44:09+05:30 IST

హైదరాబాద్ ముస్లింలు అందరికీ రజాకార్ హింసాకాండలో ప్రమేయమున్నదనేది ఒక తప్పుడు భావన. హైదరాబాద్ స్వతంత్ర దేశంగా ఉండాలని ప్రగాఢంగా కోరుకున్న ముస్లింలలో అత్యధికులు హిందువులపై హింసకు పాల్పడలేదు....

ముస్లిం వ్యతిరేక కథనాలతో వాస్తవాలకు మసి!

హైదరాబాద్ ముస్లింలు అందరికీ రజాకార్ హింసాకాండలో ప్రమేయమున్నదనేది ఒక తప్పుడు భావన. హైదరాబాద్ స్వతంత్ర దేశంగా ఉండాలని ప్రగాఢంగా కోరుకున్న ముస్లింలలో అత్యధికులు హిందువులపై హింసకు పాల్పడలేదు. అటువంటి దాడులకు పాల్పడుతున్నవారికి ఏ విధంగాను సహకరించలేదు. అనేక చోట్ల ముస్లిం నేత కార్మికులను హిందూ నేతన్నలు రక్షించారని సుందర్‌ లాల్ పేర్కొన్నారు. సార్వత్రక ఎన్నికలు సమీపించిన ప్రస్తుత తరుణంలో ఈ మత సామరస్య గాథలను ప్రజలలోకి తీసుకువెళ్లాల్సిన అవసరం ఉంది.

Pause

Unmute

Remaining Time -5:25

Close Player

సామాజిక సమూహాలు తీవ్ర భావోద్వేగాలకు లోనై, వివేచనను విడనాడినప్పుడు సంభవించేదేమిటి? హైదరాబాద్‌లో పోలీసు చర్య సందర్భాన్ని నిశితంగా పరిశీలిస్తే పై ప్రశ్నకు సమాధానం లభిస్తుంది. ఈ సెప్టెంబర్ 17న, ఆ పోలీసు చర్యకు సరిగ్గా 75 ఏళ్లు. ఒక విషాదాన్ని ఓటర్ల మధ్య విభజనలు సృష్టించేందుకు రాజకీయవేత్తలు, ఇతర అవకాశవాదులు ఉపయోగించుకుంటున్న దృష్ట్యా ఆ సంఘటనపై నిష్పాక్షిక పరిశీలనకు మరింత ప్రాధాన్యమున్నది. 1948లో హైదరాబాద్ పరిస్థితి ప్రజలు అర్థం చేసుకున్న దానికంటే మరింత సంక్లిష్టమైనది. ఆనాటి ఘటనలను నిశితంగా చూచినప్పుడు పోలీసు చర్య అనుభవం కులం, సామాజిక వర్గం, ఇతర అస్తిత్వాలతో నిర్ణయింపబడింది.

ఇటీవల ‘రజాకార్’ అనే సినిమా ముస్లింలను దుష్ట స్వభావులుగా చిత్రీకరించింది. ముస్లింల పట్ల ఇటువంటి విషపూరిత ప్రచారానికి 1947–48లో చారిత్రక పూర్వోదాహరణలు ఉన్నాయి. ఆ కాలంలో హైదరాబాద్ సంస్థానాన్ని ‘భారత్‌ను పీడిస్తున్న కేన్సర్ వ్యాధి’గా, ‘రోగగ్రస్త అవయవం’గా తూష్ణీకరించేవారు. పోలీసు చర్య పూర్వాపర సంఘటనల క్రమాన్ని అర్థం చేసుకునేందుకు ఒకప్పుడు అణగదొక్కబడిన పండిట్ సుందర్‌లాల్ కమిటీ నివేదికను చదవవలసిన అవసరమున్నది. స్వాతంత్ర్య సమరయోధుడు, గాంధేయవాది పండిట్ సుందర్‌లాల్ నేతృత్వంలోని కమిటీ ఘటనల క్రమాన్ని సవివరంగా నమోదు చేయడంతో పాటు వాటిపై నిష్పాక్షిక వ్యాఖ్యలు చేసింది. అత్యంత జాగ్రత్తతో రూపొందించిన ఆ నివేదికను చాలా కాలం పాటు ప్రజల దృష్టికి రాకుండా చేశారు. అయితే సుందర్‌లాల్ బృందంలో సభ్యుడు, రాజకీయ వేత్తగా మారిన న్యాయవాది యూనస్ సలీం ఒక అనామక పత్రికలో దాని గురించి చేసిన ప్రస్తావన పార్లమెంటులో ప్రకంపనలు సృష్టించింది. పోలీసు చర్య జరిగిన మూడు దశాబ్దాల అనంతరం ఈ పరిణామం చోటుచేసుకున్నది. సుందర్‌లాల్ కమిటీ తుది నివేదిక ప్రతినొకదాన్ని పది సంవత్సరాల క్రితం నెహ్రూ మెమోరియల్ మ్యూజియం అండ్ లైబ్రరీలో పరిశోధకులు కనుగొన్నప్పుడు అది ఎట్టకేలకు లోకం దృష్టికి వచ్చింది.

1947లో దేశ విభజన తరుణంలో హైదరాబాద్ సంస్థానంలోని హిందువులు రజాకారుల దాడులకు గురవుతుండేవారు. అతిశయోక్తులకు తావులేకుండా అంగీకరించవలసిన చారిత్రక వాస్తవమిది. సుందర్‌లాల్ కమిటీ నివేదిక ఇలా పేర్కొంది: ‘రజాకార్ దురాగతాలలో ప్రధానమైనది ప్రతీ పట్టణం, ప్రతీ గ్రామంపై నెలసరి సామూహిక జరిమానాను విధించడం. రజాకారులు విధించిన మొత్తాన్ని చెల్లించడం జరిగితే మరెటువంటి సమస్య ఉండేదికాదు. ఎక్కడైనా చెల్లించడానికి నిరాకరిస్తే లూటీలు జరిగేవి. అప్పటికీ ప్రజలు ఆ సామూహిక జరిమానాను చెల్లించేందుకు తిరస్కరిస్తే రజాకారులు హింసకు పాల్పడేవారు. హత్యలు చేసేవారు. కొన్ని సందర్భాలలో అత్యాచారాలు కూడా జరిగేవి’.

హైదరాబాద్ ముస్లింలు అందరికీ రజాకార్ హింసాకాండలో ప్రమేయమున్నదనేది ఒక తప్పుడు భావన. అది పలు విధాలుగా సత్యదూరమైనది. హైదరాబాద్ స్వతంత్ర దేశంగా ఉండాలని ప్రగాఢంగా కోరుకున్న ముస్లింలలో అత్యధికులు హిందువులపై హింసకు పాల్పడలేదు. అటువంటి దాడులకు పాల్పడుతున్నవారికి ఏ విధంగాను సహకరించలేదు. నాటి ముస్లిం సంస్థలలో ప్రధానమైనది మజ్లిస్ ఇత్తేహాద్ ఉల్ ముస్లిమీన్. దీనికి కాశిమ్ రజ్వీ నాయకుడు. ఆ సంస్థపై అతడికి పూర్తి పట్టు ఉండేది. అయినప్పటికీ ఆనాటి పరిస్థితులకు ముస్లింలు ఎలా ప్రతిస్పందించాలనే విషయమై మజ్లిస్ కనీసం మూడు వర్గాలుగా చీలిపోయింది. హైదరాబాద్ కొన్ని షరతులతో శాంతియుతంగా భారత్‌లో విలీనమవ్వాలని వాటిలో రెండు వర్గాలు కోరుకునేవి.

హైదరాబాద్ సంస్థాన ముస్లింలు అందరికీ ప్రాతినిధ్యం వహించే హక్కు తమకు మాత్రమే ఉన్నదన్న రజ్వీ నాయకత్వంలోని మజ్లిస్ వాదనను పలువురు సవాల్ చేశారు. కవి, కమ్యూనిస్టు నాయకుడు మఖ్దుం మోహియుద్దీన్ రాసిన ఒక పుస్తకంలో మజ్లిస్ కేవలం రెండువేల భూస్వామ్య కుటుంబాలు, ఉన్నతాధికారులు, పెట్టుబడిదారులకు మాత్రమే గానీ సంస్థానంలోని సమస్త ముస్లింలకు ప్రాతినిధ్యం వహించే సంస్థ కానేకాదని స్పష్టం చేశారు. దానికి అలాంటి హక్కు లేనేలేదని ఆయన ఖండితంగా చెప్పారు. హైదరాబాద్‌లోని ఇరవైలక్షల మంది సామాన్య ముస్లింల పరిస్థితి వారి సహచర హిందువుల స్థితిగతులకు భిన్నంగా లేవని గణాంకాలతో మఖ్దూం విశదం చేశారు. రజ్వీ ప్రభావం ముస్లింలు అందరిపైన లేదనడానికి ఇంకా అనేక నిదర్శనాలు ఉన్నాయి.

రజ్వీ సన్నిహిత మిత్రులు, నమ్మకస్తులలో మధ్యతరగతి హిందువులు కూడా ఉండేవారు. వారిలో చాలామంది అతడి సొంత పట్టణమైన లాతూరు, దాని పరిసర ప్రాంతాలకు చెందినవారే. అతడి కుటుంబ డాక్టర్ ఒక హిందూ మహిళ. రజ్వీ కుటుంబం ఏకాకి అయిపోయిన సమయంలో కూడా ఆమె వారికి అండగా నిలబడ్డారు. హిందువులతో రజ్వీ వ్యక్తిగత సంబంధాలపై జడ్జి, స్వామి రామానంద తీర్థ జీవిత చరిత్రకారుడు నరేంద్ర చాపల్ గావోంకర్ తన ‘ది లాస్ట్ నిజాం అండ్ హిజ్ పీపుల్ ’అన్న పుస్తకంలో పలు ఆసక్తికరమైన విషయాలు వెల్లడించారు. ఆయన ఇలా రాశారు: ‘ప్రజల దృష్టిలో రజ్వీ ఒక విలన్. తన ఉద్రేకపూరిత ప్రసంగాలతో అతడు హింసాకాండను రెచ్చగొట్టాడనడంలో సందేహం లేదు. అయితే అతడెప్పుడూ వ్యక్తిగతంగా ఆయుధాన్ని చేపట్టలేదు. అటువంటి వ్యక్తుల ధోరణి అలానే ఉంటుందనుకోండి. అదలా ఉంచితే రజ్వీ తన ప్రవర్తనలో క్రూరుడు, హింసాత్మక ప్రవృత్తి ఉన్న వ్యక్తి కాదు. సామాన్య వ్యక్తులు అందరూ వ్యవహరించే విధంగానే అతడూ వ్యవహరించేవాడు. రజాకార్ ఉద్యమం తీవ్ర స్థాయిలో ఉన్నప్పుడు రజ్వీ తన కార్యాలయానికి వచ్చి టీ తెప్పించమని ఉల్లాసంగా అడిగేవాడని నిజామ్ విజయ్ అనే మరాఠీ వారపత్రిక సంపాదకుడు వాసుదేవరావు ఫతక్ రాశారు’.

పోలీసు చర్య ప్రభావం మతాలకు అతీతంగా కవులు, కళాకారుపై కూడా ఉన్నది. గజల్ గాయకులు రైస్, విఠల్ రావులకు కొత్త వ్యవస్థలో పోషణ, ప్రోత్సాహం కొరవడింది. కవులు, రచయితలు అనువాదకులు తదితరులు అకస్మాత్తుగా ఆదాయాన్ని కోల్పోయారు.

పోలీసు చర్య ప్రభావం సంస్థాన ప్రజలపై భిన్న రీతుల్లో ఉందని సుందర్‌లాల్ కమిటీ నివేదిక, ఆనాటి ఉర్దూ వార్తాపత్రికల కథనాలు, ప్రత్యక్ష సాక్షులు వివరణలు స్పష్టంగా వెల్లడించాయి. ప్రదేశాలను బట్టి, వ్యక్తుల సామాజిక స్థాయిని బట్టి ఆ ప్రభావం వేర్వేరు విధాలుగా ఉండేది. అయితే ముస్లింలు అందరూ ఏదో ఒక విధంగా ప్రభావితులయ్యారనేది ఒక స్థిర సత్యం. పోలీసుచర్య సమయంలోనూ, ఆ తరువాత ముస్లింలపై తీవ్ర స్థాయిలో ప్రతీకార దాడులు జరిగాయి. హింసాకాండలో ఎటువంటి ప్రమేయం లేనివారు సైతం ఈ కక్ష పూరిత దాడులకు బాధితులుఅయ్యారు. సుందర్‌లాల్ కమిటీ నివేదిక ఇలా పేర్కొంది: ‘ప్రతీ ఒక్క రజాకార్ చర్యలకు కనీసం వంద మంది ముస్లింలు మూల్యం చెల్లించడం జరిగింది మృతదేహాలతో నిండిపోయిన బావులను మాకు చూపించారు’. సరిహద్దు జిల్లాల్లోను, రజాకార్ కార్యకలాపాలు ముమ్మరంగా జరిగిన పట్టణాలలో ప్రతీకార దాడులు తీవ్రంగా చోటుచేసుకున్నాయి.

తీవ్ర విపత్కర పరిస్థితులలోనూ ముస్లింలు, హిందువుల మధ్య సౌభ్రాతృత్వం వర్ధిల్లిన ఉదంతాలు అనేకమున్నాయి. రజాకార్ ఉద్యమం ఉధృతంగా ఉన్నప్పుడు తమ ఇరుగుపొరుగున ఉన్న హిందువులకు ఎటువంటి హాని జరగకుండా ముస్లింలు జాగ్రత్త వహించారు. హిందువులను కాపాడే విషయంలో మషాయిఖ్ అనే సూఫీ ఆధ్యాత్మిక నాయకులు చూపిన చొరవ చాలా ముఖ్యమైనది. అలాగే పోలీసుచర్య సమయంలోనూ, ఆ తరువాత హిందువులు సహచర ముస్లింలను కాపాడేందుకు తమ ప్రాణాలను ఒడ్డారు. అనేక చోట్ల ముస్లిం నేత కార్మికులను హిందూ నేతన్నలు రక్షించారని సుందర్‌లాల్ పేర్కొన్నారు అలాగే హైదరాబాద్ హిందువులు ముస్లిం మహిళలను వారి అపహర్తల నుంచి విడిపించి రక్షించారు. సార్వత్రక ఎన్నికలు సమీపించిన ప్రస్తుత తరుణంలో ఈ మత సామరస్య గాథలను ప్రజలలోకి తీసుకువెళ్లేందుకు ప్రాధాన్యమివ్వాల్సిన అవసరమున్నది.

l మొహమ్మద్ అయూబ్ ఖాన్

దక్షిణాసియా ముస్లిం రాజకీయాల, చరిత్ర పరిశోధకుడు

(సెప్టెంబర్ 17: పోలీసు చర్యకు 75 ఏళ్లు

UCC - 3,000 castes and 25,000 sub-castes in India

 Caste system in India

There are 3,000 castes and 25,000 sub-castes in India, each related to a specific occupation.[13]

Gandhi visiting Madras (now Chennai) in 1933 on an India-wide tour for Dalit (he used Harijan) causes. His writings, and speeches during such tours, discussed the discriminated-against castes of India.

The caste system in India is the paradigmatic ethnographic instance of social classification based on castes. It has its origins in ancient India, and was transformed by various ruling elites in medieval, early-modern, and modern India, especially the Mughal Empire and the British Raj.[1][2][3][4] It is today the basis of affirmative action programmes in India as enforced through its constitution.[5] The caste system consists of two different concepts, varna and jati, which may be regarded as different levels of analysis of this system.

The caste system as it exists today is thought to be the result of developments during the collapse of the Mughal era and the rise of the British colonial government in India.[1][6][7] The British Raj furthered this development, making rigid caste organisation a central mechanism of administration.[6] Between 1860 and 1920, the British incorporated the Indian caste system into their system of governance, granting administrative jobs and senior appointments only to Christians and people belonging to certain castes.[8] Social unrest during the 1920s led to a change in this policy.[9] Caste was no longer used by the colonial authority to functionally organize civil society. This reflected changes in administrative practices, understandings of expertise, and the rise of new European scholarly institutions.[10] After the 1920s, the colonial administration began a policy of positive discrimination by reserving a certain percentage of government jobs for the lower castes. In 1948, negative discrimination on the basis of caste was banned by law and further enshrined in the Indian constitution in 1950;[11] however, the system continues to be practiced in parts of India.[12] There are 3,000 castes and 25,000 sub-castes in India, each related to a specific occupation.[13]

UCC - There are around 645 distinct tribes in India.

 Major Tribes in India: State-wise compilation

JUNE 5, 2021 BY CLEARIAS TEAM

Major Tribes in IndiaWhich are the major tribes in India?

The nature of what constitutes an Indian tribe and the very nature of tribes have changed considerably over centuries.

This post is about the major tribes in India – with a population of more than 10,000.

Table of Contents

What is a tribe?

Tribes in India

Major Tribes in India: Arranged State-wise

State/Union Territory-wise list of Scheduled Tribes in India (Full-List)

Points to remember

Scheduled Tribes

Article 342 in The Constitution Of India 1949

Ministry of Tribal Affairs

National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST)

The Tribal Sub Plan (TSP) strategy

What is a tribe?

A tribe is a social division in a traditional society consisting of families linked by social, economic, religious, or blood ties, with a common culture and dialect. A tribe possesses certain qualities and characteristics that make it a unique cultural, social, and political entity.

Tribes are also known by the name ‘Adivasis’ in India.

Tribes in India

The Constitution of India has recognized tribal communities in India under ‘Schedule 5’ of the constitution. Hence the tribes recognized by the Constitution are known as ‘ Scheduled Tribes’.

There are around 645 distinct tribes in India.

Click the link to know the full list of scheduled tribes in India.

In this article, we concentrate only on the major names.

Major Tribes in India: Arranged State-wise

Andhra Pradesh:  Andh, Sadhu Andh, Bhagata, Bhil, Chenchus (Chenchawar), Gadabas, Gond, Goundu, Jatapus, Kammara, Kattunayakan, Kolawar, Kolam, Konda, Manna Dhora, Pardhan, Rona, Savaras, Dabba Yerukula, Nakkala, Dhulia, Thoti, Sugalis, Banjara, Kondareddis, Koya, Mukha Dhora, Valmiki , Yenadis, Sugalis, Lambadis.

Arunachal Pradesh: Apatanis, Abor, Dafla, Galong, Momba, Sherdukpen, Singpho, Nyishi, Mishmi, Idu, Taroan, Tagin, Adi, Monpa, Wancho

Assam: Chakma, Chutiya, Dimasa, Hajong, Garos, Khasis, Gangte, Karbi, Boro, Borokachari, Kachari, Sonwal, Miri, Rabha, Garo

Bihar: Asur, Baiga, Birhor, Birjia, Chero, Gond, Parhaiya, Santhals, Savar, Kharwar, Banjara, Oraon, Santal, Tharu

Chhattisgarh: Agariya, Bhaina, Bhattra, Biar, Khond, Mawasi, Nagasia, Gond, Binjhwar, Halba, Halbi, Kawar, Sawar,

Goa: Dhodia, Dubia, Naikda, Siddi,Varli, Gawda.

Gujarat: Barda, Bamcha, Bhil, Charan, Dhodia, Gamta, Paradhi, Patelia, Dhanka, Dubla, Talavia, Halpati, Kokna, Naikda, Patelia, Rathawa, Siddi.

Himachal Pradesh: Gaddis, Gujjars, Khas, Lamba, Lahaulas, Pangwala, Swangla, Beta, Beda Bhot, Bodh.

Jammu and Kashmir: Bakarwal, Balti, Beda, Gaddi, Garra, Mon, Purigpa, Sippi, Changpa, Gujjar.

Jharkhand:  Birhors, Bhumij, Gonds, Kharia, Mundas, Santhals, Savar, Bedia, Ho, Kharwar, Lohra, Mahli, Parhaiya, Santal, Kol, Banjara.

Karnataka: Adiyan, Barda, Gond, Bhil, Iruliga, Koraga, Patelia, Yerava, Hasalaru, Koli Dhor, Marati , Meda, Naikda, Soligaru.

Kerala: Adiyan, Arandan, Eravallan, Kurumbas, Malai arayan, Moplahs, Uralis, Irular, Kanikaran, Kattunayakan, Kurichchan, Muthuvan.

Madhya Pradesh: Baigas,  Bhils, Bharia, Birhors, Gonds, Katkari, kharia, Khond, Kol, Murias, Korku, Mawasi, Pardhan, Sahariya,

Maharashtra:  Bhaina, Bhunjia, Dhodia, Katkari, Khond, Rathawa, Warlis, Dhanka, Halba, Kathodi, Kokna, Koli Mahadev, Pardhi, Thakur,

Manipur: Naga, Kuki, Meitei, Aimol, Angami, Chiru, Maram, Monsang, Paite, Purum, Thadou, Anal, Mao, Tangkhul, Thadou, Poumai Naga.

Meghalaya: Chakma, Garos, Hajong, Jaintias Khasis, Lakher, Pawai, Raba, Mikir.

Mizoram: Chakma, Dimasa, Khasi, Kuki, Lakher, Pawi, Raba, Synteng, Lushai

Nagaland:  Angami, Garo, Kachari, Kuki, Mikir, Nagas, Sema, Ao, Chakhesang, Konyak, Lotha, Phom, Rengma, Sangtam,

Odisha:  Gadaba, Ghara, Kharia, Khond, Matya, Oraons, Rajuar, Santhals, Bathudi, Bathuri, Bhottada, Bhumij, Gond, Juang, Kisan, Kolha, Kora, Khayara, Koya, Munda, Paroja, Saora, Shabar, Lodha.

Rajasthan: Bhils, Damaria, Dhanka, Meenas(Minas), Patelia, Sahariya, Naikda, Nayaka, Kathodi.

Sikkim:  Bhutia, Khas, Lepchas, Limboo, Tamang

Tamil Nadu: Adiyan, Aranadan, Eravallan, Irular, Kadar, Kanikar, Kotas, Todas, Kurumans, Malayali,

Telangana: Chenchus.

Tripura: Bhil, Bhutia, Chaimal, Chakma, Halam, Khasia, Lushai, Mizel, Namte, Mag, Munda, Riang,

Uttarakhand: Bhotias, Buksa, Jannsari, Khas, Raji, Tharu.

Uttar Pradesh: Bhotia, Buksa, Jaunsari, Kol, Raji, Tharu, Gond, Kharwar, Saharya , Parahiya, Baiga, Agariya, Chero

West Bengal: Asur, Khond, Hajong, Ho, Parhaiya,  Rabha, Santhals, Savar, Bhumij, Bhutia, Chik Baraik, Kisan, Kora, Lodha, Kheria, Khariam, Mahali, Mal Pahariya, Oraon,

Andaman and Nicobar:  Oraons, Onges, Sentinelese, Shompens.

State/Union Territory-wise list of Scheduled Tribes in India (Full-List)

Article 342 provides for listing of scheduled tribes State/Union Territory wise and not on an all India basis.

List of Scheduled Tribes in India (PDF)

Points to remember

The total population of Scheduled Tribes is 10.43 crore as per the Census 2011 which accounts for 8.6% of the total population of the country. The share of the Scheduled Tribe population in urban areas is a meagre 2.8%.

Madhya Pradesh, Maharastra, Orissa, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal, and Karnataka are the State having a larger number of Scheduled Tribes These states account for 83.2% of the total Scheduled Tribe population of the country. Assam, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Jammu & Kashmir, Tripura, Mizoram, Bihar, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh, and Tamil Nadu, accounting for another 15.3% of the total Scheduled Tribe population. The share of the remaining states / Uts is negligible.

The Scheduled Tribes in India form the largest proportion of the total population in Lakshadweep and Mizoram followed by Nagaland and Meghalaya.

Madhya Pradesh has the largest number of scheduled Tribes followed by Orissa.

Bastar district of Chattisgarh consists of the largest number of Scheduled Tribes.

There are no Scheduled Tribes in Punjab, Delhi, Chandigarh, Pondicherry, Haryana.

In Lok Sabha, there is a reservation of seats for Scheduled Tribes. Here also census figures are taken into account. Allocation of seats for Scheduled Tribes in the Lok Sabha are made on the basis of the proportion of Scheduled Tribes in the State concerned to that of the total population, vide provision contained in Article 330 of the Constitution of India read with Section 3 of the R. P. Act, 1950.

For Scheduled Tribes, 47 seats are reserved in Lok Sabha. The 1st schedule to R. P. Act, 1950  as amended vide Representation of People (Amendment) Act, 2008 gives the Statewise break up

Scheduled Tribes

Article 366 (25) defined scheduled tribes as “such tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within such tribes or tribal communities as are deemed under Article 342 to be Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of this constitution”.

Article 342 in The Constitution Of India 1949

Scheduled Tribes

(1) The President may with respect to any State or Union territory, and where it is a State, after consultation with the Governor thereof, by public notification, specify the tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within tribes or tribal communities which shall for the purposes of this Constitution be deemed to be Scheduled Tribes in relation to that State or Union territory, as the case may be

(2) Parliament may by law include in or exclude from the list of Scheduled Tribes specified in a notification issued under clause ( 1 ) any tribe or tribal community or part of or group within any tribe or tribal community, but save as aforesaid a notification issued under the said clause shall not be varied by any subsequent notification PART XVII OFFICIAL LANGUAGE CHAPTER I LANGUAGE OF THE UNION.

Ministry of Tribal Affairs

The Ministry of Tribal Affairs is responsible for the overall development of the scheduled tribes in India. This Ministry was set up in 1999 after the bifurcation of the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment with the objective of providing a more focused approach on the integrated socio-economic development of the Scheduled Tribes (STs), the most underprivileged of the Indian Society, in a coordinated and planned manner.

The Ministry of Tribal Affairs shall be the nodal Ministry for overall policy, planning and coordination of programmes of development for the Scheduled Tribes. In regard to sectoral programmes and schemes of development of these communities policy, planning, monitoring, evaluation etc. as also, their coordination will be the responsibility of the concerned Central Ministries/ Departments, State Governments and Union Territory Administrations. Each Central Ministry/Department will be the nodal Ministry or Department concerning its sector.

Before the formation of the Ministry, tribal affairs were handled by different Ministries as follows:

As a Division of the Ministry of Home Affairs named as ‘Tribal Division’ since independence up to September 1985.

Ministry of Welfare: From September 1985 to May 1998.

Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment from May 1998 to September 1999.

National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST)

The National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) was established by amending Article 338 and inserting a new Article 338A in the Constitution through the Constitution (89th Amendment) Act, 2003. By this amendment, the erstwhile National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes was replaced by two separate Commissions namely- (i) the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC), and (ii) the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) w.e.f. 19 February 2004.

The Tribal Sub Plan (TSP) strategy

The Tribal Sub Plan (TSP) strategy is a Government of India initiative aimed for the rapid socio-economic development of tribal people. The funds provided under the Tribal Sub Plan of the State have to be at least equal in proportion to the ST population of each State or UTs.

Similarly, Central Ministries/Departments are also required to earmark funds out of their budget for the Tribal Sub-Plan. As per guidelines issued by the Planning Commission, the Tribal Sub Plan funds are to be non-divertible and non-lapsable.

The National Commission for Scheduled Tribes is vested with the duty to participate and advise in the planning process of socio-economic development of STs, and to evaluate the progress of their development under the Union and any State.