On August 31 the UPA government said a big no to a separate Sikh Marriage Act. It invented a filmsy reason; providing a separate law for the Sikhs would invite similar demands from other communities. Union Law Minister Salman Khurshid reasoned: “There may not be any justification for secluding Sikhs from the rest of the categories --covered by the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955-- as such a step would invite similar demands from other religious denominations. It is against the directive principles in Part IV of the Constitution, and Article 44, which aims at bringing in a Uniform Civil Code.” This was supposed to be the lucid response to a query by Shiromani Akali Dal MP Sukhdev Singh Dhindsa in the RajyaSabha. No amendment to the Anand Karaj (Marriage) Act of 1909, he declared. Evidently, Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh, himself a Sikh aware of the sensitivities of a large majority of Sikhs, should have cleared this issue.
Three days later, the same minister, sensing the anger and protest all across India and abroad admitted the blunder. Khurshid said, “We are open to examining good proposals that help us resolve the issue. Let someone come up with a modern, sensible idea regarding what can be done and we will examine the same”. He was aware that the issue was a highly emotional one for the Sikhs who had long agitated for it. He was, however, quick to add, “But we do not want to end one trouble and invite more.”
Then he spoke eloquently, much like a good lawyer, proposing for the entire country a Central Register of Marriages with codes for different communities. This could be on the pattern of the one for births and deaths. It can register marriages of all communities and bring in the era of uniformity in the country. A national mechanism for registration of marriages can be considered. Everyone can register their marriages in such a system. We can have codes for different communities. But the minister wanted a formal suggestion to come from someone.
Indeed laudable. But what prompted the minister, at the first instance, to reject the demand, particularly when SGPC elections are underway? And then, what a clumsy explanation for the question of why the Centre had decided to abandon the proposal to amend the Anand Marriage Act with an enabling clause that would allow all Sikhs to register their marriages within the said legislation and thereby prevent them from getting the marriage registered under another Act - the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Even the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice had recommended such an amendment. The minister explained that dropping of the said amendment was a view taken by the government which was in any case open to rational solutions to the problem being raised by the Sikhs.
INLD Rajya Sabha member, Tarlochan Singh in 2008 had succeeded in getting a proposal in this regard approved by the Parliamentary Committee for Law and Justice. The previous law minister had already announced in the House that the amendment Bill will be moved very soon.
The marriages performed under Sikh religious rights are registered either under the Hindu Marriage Act or the Special Marriage Act. The old one-page British law of 1909 was no longer applicable. Our Constitution’s Article 25 that deals with religious freedom laudably states, “All persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion”. It’s Explanation II - In sub-Clause (b) of clause (2), “the reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly”. As present, Sikh marriages can be solemnised as per Sikh rites but the registration of Sikh marriages must occur under the Hindu Marriage Act.
It is here the Sikhs, by and large, feel that they are being clubbed with Hindus. The common refrain since 1955 has been to recognise Sikhism as a separate religion like Islam and its customs and marriage ceremonies should be given legal status. Not only Congress, but to some extent even BJP has seen this as a separatist tendency. The Akalis could not persuade their political partners, BJP, to get Sikhism constitutional locus. There is per se no clash between Sikhism and Hinduism, followers of the two religions continue to exist in the same families and they share many customs and festivals. Sikh principles do not attach any importance to asceticism, idol worships as a means to attain salvation. It stresses on the need of leading life as a householder. Sikhism is a monotheistic and a revealed religion. In Sikhism, God-termed Vāhigurū-is shapeless and timeless. Just one God and there is no multiplicity of gods. In outer form a baptised Sikh wears a turban, does not shorn his or her hair, wears kaccha (long underwear) , kara (iron bangle) and kirpan (sword).
The Anand Karaj usually takes place at a gurdwara, although not necessarily so; the marriage may also be conducted at the bride’s residence or any other place where the Guru Granth Sahib has been installed. Any Amritdhari , baptised Sikh may perform the marriage ceremony. In a recent hukamnama of the Sri Akaal TakhtSahib,ie. , Anand Karaj could take place only in the Gurudwara as Sri Guru Granth Sahib is not be taken to any marriage hall. Interestingly,
Pakistan had adopted the amended Anand Marriage Act a couple of years ago.
Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal has reacted strongly and called it a “breach of trust” by the Centre, as the former law minister M Veerappa Moily had assured the draft bill for Sikh Marriage Act was ready and would be sent for cabinet approval soon before being placed in Parliament.
The proposal was that under the Special Marriage Act, which was to be amended, provision for the registration of marriages performed according to the Anand Marriage Act of 1909 shall also be incorporated.
-
by GOBIND THUKRAL (COURTESY- DAILYPOST,CHD,SEPT.4,2011,
Disclaimer : The opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the writer/author. The facts and opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of Babushahi.com or Tirchhi Nazar Media. Babushahi.com or Tirchhi Nazar Media does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.