TheKarnataka Legislative Assembly recently passed the ‘Karnataka Freedom of Choice in Marriage and Prevention and Prohibition of Crimes in the Name of Honour and Tradition (Eva Nammava Eva Nammava)’ Bill, which pointedly states that “the consent of parents, family, caste, or clan is not necessary once two adult individuals agree to go into wedlock. The phrase ‘Eva Nammava Eva Nammava’ dates to the philosophy of the 12th century social reformer Basavanna. It is a part of one of his ‘vachanas’, that translates to “……do not ask who he is, who he is, who he is…..”

“Say he is our own, he is our own, he is our own.

Lord Koodalasangama, say he is a son of your house,”

That message of inclusivity highlighted the need for inclusivity, in the context of Basavanna having facilitated a Dalit man’s marriage to a Brahmin woman that led to an intense social turmoil and violence.

The aim of the legislation is to provide legal protection to couples who are facing threats of violence or coercion in inter-caste relationships, recognising the need to curb the alarming increase in violence, harassment, threats, and ostracism, perpetrated in the name of caste, hierarchy, honour and custom. It also notes that such crimes disproportionately affect women. The step was necessitated by the fact that the state had witnessed several hate crimes against such couples in the recent past. In a particularly heinous instance of honour related violence, a 20-year-old woman was killed in a gruesome manner by her father for marrying a Dalit man.

Many countries have also put in place legislation banning forced marriages and facilitating inter – faith or inter-caste unions.

Interestingly, the legislation is in sharp contrast to a recent proposal of the government of Gujarat, which requires couples wanting to register their marriages to submit identity documents of their parents, accompanied by a declaration that the parents have been kept informed.

What happened in Karnataka is only one manifestation of the ongoing worldwide transformation in the concept of marriage. From having, earlier, been a social or family obligation based on traditional grounds, such as caste, religion, or family status, the institution of marriage is increasingly being viewed as a matter of personal choice, emotional compatibility, and individual autonomy. There is, in evidence, a global decline in traditional matchmaking, even in traditional conservative societies.

Another emerging feature of marriages is that couples are prioritising education and careers over early marriages and marrying later in life, allowing more time for personal choice. Marriages are increasingly being seen as a partnership or companionship rather than merely instruments of procreation of financial stability, like love marriages and self-choice weddings. Consequently, there is a welcome and rapidly decreasing value being attached to factors like caste, religion, and, most importantly, the practice of demanding and accepting dowry. The classical and age-old belief was that marriages are made in heaven or that they are divine, predestined and ordained by fate rather than mere coincidences.

Even in traditionally conservative cultures, including in the Middle Eastern countries and parts of Asia, a growing number of women are seen fighting for the right choice in marriages and opposing forced unions. This is evident in India too. While the practice of arranged marriages has not disappeared altogether, a hybrid variety of what are called – ‘arranged with choice’ are becoming increasingly common.

Interestingly, a novel concept of a ‘trial’ for a marriage is also gaining popularity in certain urban settings, a sort of live – in relationship as a prelude to a permanent relationship by way of marriage. In the changing ambience of marriages, one also sees a reduction in the stigma attached to divorce and remarriages. In a manner of speaking, it is almost as though lifelong love and heterosexual marriages are about as obsolete as a horse and carriage.

One way of looking at the emerging scenario is that the world community is amid a transition to a brave new world of intimacy. It is against such a background that one must view the significance of the events in Gujarat and Karnataka.

Provisions that envisage providing protection to couples engaged in inter-caste relationships, and facing ostracisation or violence, are undoubtedly welcome. What is of essence, however, is how effectively such noble intentions are translated into concrete actions, especially against the background of crimes against such couples having continued in the past, existing laws notwithstanding. An even more pertinent issue arises in the present context, as caste consolidation rather than annihilation is very much in evidence, not merely in the way partners are chosen in marriages, but also the way candidates are picked by political parties and voted to positions of authority by the electorate.

The situation gets curiouser and curiouser when one notes the fact that Karnataka is yet to roll back the controversial law of 2022, dealing with freedom of religion and ushered in by the then BJP government. Some way forward suggestions establishment of specialised fast-track courts to deal exclusively with honour killings to ensure swift justice and prevent delays, by bringing in an amendment to the Special Marriage Act, 1954 to shorten the registration period in order to protect couples from potential threat surveillance and introduction of a provision in the ‘Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita’ law clearly defining what honour killing is and specifying punishments.

Matrimonial advertisements in newspapers are a popular, traditional way to find partners, widely used for their broad reach and credibility. Leading newspapers offer dedicated weekly supplements for matrimonial classifieds. A very sensible suggestion by an elderly friend (who, incidentally, is happily married) is that it might be worthwhile putting in place a mechanism which will function as an advisory arrangement, to couples intending to get married. An agency or a set of experts, in other words, to counsel them about the pros and cons of the proposed union, before it is formalized by a ceremony or a registration. That way, it is felt, they will make an informed entry into the era of married life, with their eyes wide open. Even the central and state governments will do well to think in terms of creating an environment which enables such arrangements to be formed and to function, together with creating a regulatory mechanism to ensure that they are not misused.

Some examples from my personal experience reinforce the validity of the issue under discussion. My marriage and those of some of my friends and relatives have also been a sort of mixed bag in this context. Usha and I got married through an ‘arranged-but-confirmed-by-choice’ mode. One of my nephews married his paternal uncle’s daughter, which, in fact, is frowned upon in the Hindu religion. Another friend is the happy result of a Christian-Muslim marriage. And by God’s grace, all the unions have resulted in pleasant and well-adjusted relationships.

(The writer was formerly Chief Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh)