Child Marriages and Law in India

A Survey says that half of the Indian girls married off before 18.
What are the reasons that force parents to break the laws?
Why the Child Marriage Restraint Act is not strictly enforced by the State Government concerned?

Vrij said…
Most of these cases happen in rural areas. Caste politics prevents any law enforcer to take up the issue as the politicians ignore these cases just to secure their vote banks.

nz said…
Hmmmm.....is it still going on ? And if it is still happening then it could be bcos no one really wants to get involved in someone else's personal matter - dont you have to bring to the authority's attention for them to act on it ? Moreover, when I think about from where I live - I am pretty happy that atleast they are getting married (there in India).But my personal opinion - even 18 is way too young to get married. Ideally, they should first complete their education and become financially independent.

Has to be me said…
I think it cud be cos of illiteracy & poverty. Maybe those parents wanna shudder off their responsibility by marrying off their girl child into another family & feel that their duty ends there.

lostpatrol53 said…
Going by statistics of BIMARU states Vs Others Vs National Average, literacy and education is a factor. Social acceptability of laws is another. Our job is cut out. Laws must be communicated in a manner the society accepts them as aimed at its benefit. At family level, parents fear more trust less; they do not have faith in their own daughters. The men put too much stress on 'virgi' brides. The mothers attach too much importance to 'khandan ki ijjat aur maryada'. A RSS functionary decried colleges as a place where Hindu girls find their moslem yaars and run away with them, thus ranting against college education for girls. At community level, 'naak kat gayegi' is a major motivation to have the women married. Go to my post 'Will you marry my daughter after she is 26?', (o3.indiatimes.com/lostpatrol53/archive/2006/07/07/946829.aspx) This is a real question thrown at me at the wedding of my classmate was married of at 16....

savy said…
it is mere shirking the responsibility of so called daughter watch...the paranoa of sumthing"bad" happening as the girl matures takes hold of better senses..as far as I know..this is the main n only reason.they love to wash hands off the additional burden of vigilance.

umesh said…
Child marriage is a curse to the society. with the marriage, child's education is sacrificed. Girls become vulnerable to domestic violence. they are weakened by early pregnency. sixty per cent babies born to under 17 year old mothers, die during first year itself. Parents prefer earley marriages to reduce multiple marriage cost, and to relieve from the burden of feeding and education.and sometimes protect the girl's honour througout adolscence. India's campaign to stop child marriages is failed and it is a half hearted attempt. Law is weak. Parents can't be sentenced for more than three months. Although child marriages are unlawful, but the marriage is valid, once performed. Neither he political parties nor the legal fraternity is keen to solve this problem. Reason is illitracy and people are ignorant to know the truth. cheers,

frenchita said…
parents break the laws against child marriages because 1. its easier to palm off a young girl ....shes more sellable .. 2.she has no say in it and so it becomes the parents' choice ..even if the boy is cross eyed or lame ...she has to accept it 3. the paretns of the boy ..should they find an offer with lots of dowry will not wait ..but grab the opportunity 4. the earlier the marraige ..one less mouth to feed 5. if the girl marries early ..and has many children ..especially boys ..they can be made to work in the fields and rendered useful.. lousy deal ! like any other law , the govt has not been able to enforce this one too why 1.lot of money has been passed around 2 so the officials look the other way 3.no punishment is given to the perpetrators

Adultery and Society

Criminal Justice Policy draft says that adultery should be treated as a social
rather than a criminal offence. Do you think that this draft is good for society?

Protegeoflife said…
shud be treated as offence

GussaWaala said…
In a free society why should adultery be a crime? I think the government should focus on more important issues. Parents, society, communities, and good education should teach people appropriate moral values. However, at the end of the day no one can enforce it.

lavina said…
Oh, so we are left with no other serious issue other than adultery??

Vrij said…
Does that provide more liberty to indulge in adultery?

frenchita said…
If at all adultery is an offence ..it is an social one ..hardly criminal ..unless there is physical abuse associated .. should be handled on an individual basis ..certainly should not be encouraged !!

Has to be me said…
By doing so arent they encouraging adultery? Anycase an offence is an offence...irrespective of whether it is social or criminal! And surely steps shd be taken to set it right.

umesh said…
It is basically a social problem.But marriage is not mockery.adultery kills the partner emotionally, cripple the self confidence and leaves a permanent scar. In India, men takes wives for granted.This might give them a licence commit adultary without fear.No, we are not ready yet. it is still a crime.

lostpatrol53 said…
Adultery is breach of contract, trust and covenant between two individuals. It is akin to cheating, forgery and therefore should be treated as such. It should continue to be criminal offense.

garfield1754 said…
Hi, You know what we ppl are the biggest Hypocrites , we believe or do something and say something, dont understand wby it is like this . Ppl who say its is social issue generally are the ones doing it at ground level . Criminal offence - No way ..whats wrong in doing a thing by which we feel happy about it . I tell you we take it as crime or social taboo because of the ppl we have around .Moreover there is nothing wrong or right about anything it is all relative and person dependent . If this issue have been raised in other part of the word there would have been no fuss about it and infct ppl have ignored something as foolish as this . So till the time ur happy and its for the good i dont see anything wrong in it . It shud not be criminal offence at all and as for social thing ..its complicated to discuss as depends where we live and what kind of ppl we have around .

DecentmonKey said…
Agree with the new policy draft.. This also highlights the need to amend more such old and outdated laws..

savy said…
adultry is as bad as any other bad habit...but effects are more devastating..still it remains only a social problem.With changing lifestyles..it is soon going to cease being even that because we are developing tolerance and acceptance in the same way as getting desensitised..

Ban on cooking at food vends on footpaths

The Supreme Court banned cooking at food vends on footpaths while finalizing the hawking and squatting schemes for Delhi.
Do you think that this decision is in the interest of public?

lostpatrol53 said…
The intended (ideal) result is in the national and public interest. The real (would be) result is not. The hawkers will find new businesses; the customers will find new outlets to eat; the footpaths will be taken over by anyone but the pedestrians unless and until the law enforcers are not bribed and won't be swayedby bribes. We need to return the footpaths to our pedestrians, the roads to our vehicles and the buildings to our businesses. A Supreme Court ban alone can't do it. Open spaces, even sections of public places where people congregate are required to be set apart exclusivley for food vendors, for cooking and running their cheap eateries...

GussaWaala said…
Yes it is in the interest of the 300 million that make up India's middle and upper class, thrives on corruption and bribes, and rules the remaining 700 million. How dare a poor man start a business from which I cannot profit or to which I cannot dictate terms.

blogesh said…
Yes it is and has to be.

umesh said…
It is a welcome judgement. It is not only the matter of hygiene, public health and disease, it also relates the problem of encroachment of footpath, thus reducing accidents. Supreme Court is doing a good job for delhi. God save other cities!!

Sumit said…
Well it should be. But if you are taking something away you have to have alternatives and if they cannot comeup with hygenic and edible alternatives that are available at ease it will turn out to be a lost cause. This should be an exercise for doing things the right way rather than not doing the wrong things.

TD23 said…
if u didnt have roadside food u wud never have delicacies like Bhelpuri, Puchkas, Rolls, Vadapavs, Chaats the likes!! i personally feel its not that good a decision. i mean cmon, roadside food have tonnes of buyers. and lets face it, the food is much betta in taste than the stuff u get in 5* hotels, and also at a cheaper price. as far as health is concerned, well obv we are taking a risk with street food, but street food cannot be blanket banned!! plus its a source of income to so many people. u cant just take away their livelihood by one decision. come up with plans for hawker mgmt. i mean thats the job of the govt rite?? if they cant do anyting about a problem, u just cant go ahead an ban it!1 road side food stalls provide food to a majority of the junta, not many can afford normal hotel rates everyday. so i personally dont feel that this decision is in the public interest.

frenchita said…
Is this a permanent decision or only while finalyzing the squatting schemes for Delhi ? If the latter ,then yes it is in the public interest .wehave to go by this decision . perhaps permanently too it will be banned in the future ...i see nothin wrong with that either .food on footpaths is unhygienic ..flies hovering over it .. the stalls preventing people from walking on pavements and tempting the police hungry for hapta .etc Home cooked food is cheapest and healthiest anyway

garfield1754 said…
The Supreme Court banned cooking at food vends on footpaths while finalizing the hawking and squatting schemes for Delhi. I think before comment on this one has to understnd what made Supreme court to gave such kind of vedict .I am not law student but let me say what i could interpret from this . The verdict says banned cooking food at vends on footpaths - So the word here is food .When we talk abt food we talk abt hygiene etc .Which is not possible at foothpaths Then it says footpaths - i think govt spent money on foothpaths so that ppl cud walk on it and nor that ppl have to walk thru garbage, etc etc So in a sense it is right of Supreme court in banning food at foothpaths . And if ur thinking what will these ppl do , where will poor ppl eat then it is another way of looking at things :-)

ruggedboyz said…
in a nation that is on the verge to developement such thing are to happen hawkers are to be moved out of certain high profile zones some strict measuers are to be deploye for a better tomorrow and that is all with a better tomorrow in mind

nz said…
Offcourse its in public interest - footpaths are meant for walking traffic.But govt should also think about the poor hawkers and give them some other option for earning their bread.

Shilpa and racism

Do you think that award to Shilpa will overshadow the controversy regarding racism and memories of the disgraceful moments ?

lavina said…
Well, after the unjustified hype and chaos created over the issue, it seems as if the result was just to prove that the European nations are not racist but support the truly deserving candidate! :)


umesh said…
The issue of racism is not new for Britain; it is just some issues come into focus and a numerous go unheeded. The color of the skin has been the sole reason because of which racism has been prevalent. I think we Indians too are the worst racists. To be honest, we have as much dirt to clean up in our own backyard. We have the worst forms of racism. We still have so many villages in India where the lower castes still can’t consume the water from the same well the upper castes drink. Even in cities, we don’t treat our servants with respect and dignity. Let us ask ourselves this question. Do we treat every human we meet everyday with the same levels of respect? Racism or not Shilpa Shetty surely is sitting on huge moneybox now. That’s how I see the whole issue.


lostpatrol53 said…
I am sure Shilpa has endured more insults in Bollywood from her industrywallahs, than at Big Brother House. She has come out of it with crowning glory and pots of gold. Shilpa, splash some of it in my motherland, please...including some on Udipi Dosas, Uthappas, and Idlis.. Racism? Yes, Indians are equally race consncious. Doctor, heal thyself, is the proverb I like to recall...


Sumit said…
I think it was a game and should have been played like one, we all know sledging is there in every game, but that doesn't mean we are going to start crying. But then again it all is a media gimmick and Even though what Shilpa did was natural, it could have easily been prevented from being telecasted on TV. Winning the competition might not revert the words, thrown by Jade and Co. but it somewhere would have widened the existing the already present racial divide, even in the minds of people who had nothing to do racism till now. At 7:39 PM, amita said…
M sure they made her win coz of the controversy ... Point is jst coz something is shown on Tv we cud raise voices against it .. What abt the racist things that happen abroad and about which we are not aware of ???

ruggedboyz said…
i think that the aversion the people in the big boss show had for shilpa, is an inate quality that the "goras" have and i dont think that the award was any consolation to all that brickbratting some how i am only happy it all ended and showed a picture of the goras mindset towards us

Rajesh (Kachra King) said…
well what ever is said and happened is bad .. sure it should be crushed ... but since shilpa won a price for what ever is said and done ... i believe the matter wud subside now ... its what one gains is more important ... thatz the way some people are ... u call them what ever u want then give them some money.... everything said is forgoten ... its sad .. but tru ... some people dont have self respect ... if shilpa had some then she wud not have accepted the price money and thrased the bloody European people

Abha said…
I think that it was just a publicity stunt and didn't deserve the kind of media attention it got in the first place. There are more serious issues in the world we live in than someone commenting on Shilpa. IT didn't deserve the headlines. Really upset about racism ?? Then find a way to deal with it in real world, its a serious issue. So what if someone passed racial comments on her- she got paid big bucks for it.

Santosh said…
I think the way Shilpa behaved is stunt of Gan.dhi.giri. As Nana Patekar said if I would have been there I would have slapped Jed for her misbehaviour not only against Shilpa but agianst all our proud nation India. Also this all looks to be publicity stunt n media gimmic. Overall this is all disgusting to us which cant be forgotten though Shilpa won the battle

DecentmonKey said…
No.. Award to Shilpa will be soon forgotten.. but the issue of racism highlighted in the world media will live on, imo..

frenchita said…
No ,it will not Shilpa was only the instrument to bring to light the racism that England still is capable of ! agree with Nana Patekar .

Thisisme said…
I have living in uk since 2 yrs and lemme b very clear that ppl here arent racist as many of our proud indians tend to think they r. Uk has got one of the most tolerant society and one which respects othr ppl's religions very well. Diwali/Id r celebrated with almost equal fanfare as xmas. I am still to come across an India which can handle its own racism that lies within the caste system v have within india. i am sure if brits etc come to india in such huge quantities and celebrate their festivals in such a big way, there wud b "protests" agnst them by our culturals watchdogs sayin that india is gettin corrupted by their presence. i think v gotta learn tolerance from UK esp london. as far as jade/danielle/jo r concerned, ppl in Uk hardly identify with them and they r all eqaully hated by brits as much as by others..Its only the media which made them celebrities and its media again which has killed their celebrity status. and for shilpa..well...it was a tv show and she has made huge moolah n kickstarted her career again.and thats spells success for her. what happnd is the house is history for her and smthng which made her win. and for those who think she won coz brits wanted to prove how magnimous they r..pls come n have a luk at the number of asians here..u wud knw y she won then :P:P:D:D