|
>How is this liberal?
Sorry, wrong word. I should have
said too much for "monority protection". Is that liberalization? May be
not.
I agree with your statement for any
protection for women:
>At the moment, one can get a birth, death or marriage certificate in
India by signing an affidavit, if one needs a certificate. Why can't it stay
that way? If the city >folks need such certificates for whatever reason, let
them pay for it and get it.
Leave us alone.
RB
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 4:56
PM
Subject: Re: [Assam] Marriage made at
registrar's -Telegraph
"Overall I see 500 million nightmares for Indians
which I don't have now. We are burdening the simple rural Indian life with too
much paperwork. I would rather let some husband abandon their wives without
protectyion. I think India is going too mych on liberal side without
knowing what libarization means."
--- How is this liberal? It would've
been liberal if a couple was allowed to live together even without a religious
ceremony and the court recognized that. I feel the registration process
is going to the contrary, too much of conservatism.
Now regarding vetting the law - doesn't it come to the
state for ratification? I believe it does according to the constitution and it
doesn't become a law unless a certain number of states vote yes. Assam can
always say no and hopefully a few other states also will say no.
Registration of birth, death and marriage is a routine procedure in most
western countries. I don't know how it is in China and the east, Africa, or
the middle east. At the moment, one can get a birth, death or marriage
certificate in India by signing an affidavit, if one needs a certificate. Why
can't it stay that way? If the city folks need such certificates for whatever
reason, let them pay for it and get it.
Dilip
============================================================
Rajen
Barua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Frankly speaking I don't know
how big is this problem of 'protecting women' in India is. I know that it
may not or was not a problem for the Assamese people. I may be biased for
that. If in rest of India you think this is a real problem so much so that
we need Court registration to protect the wives, let the rest of India go
for that. But my concern is why and how the court make a ruling for all the
states based on certain report of National Commission for Women. ? Does the
commission included a real study for all the sates (rural and urban
population)? Another concern is that, say the Court Registration is stolen
by the crooked husband, or never given to the wife in the first place (in
actual case also it will be kept by the husband never to be seen by the
wife) , where the wife will stand then? Now she does not have anything. She
will loose both the worlds. Because now that registration is the only
savior, nothing else on earth can prove that they were ever legally married
although they might have been for ages.
Overall I see 500 million
nightmares for Indians which I don't have now. We are burdening the simple
rural Indian life with too much paperwork. I would rather let some husband
abandon their wives without protectyion. I think India is going too mych on
liberal side without knowing what libarization means.
RB
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006
3:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Assam] Marriage made at
registrar's -Telegraph
While a lot of things could go wrong with the implementation, we have
to remember that the court has directed to states to come up with the
rules (States have the say in how its implemented and I guess how much
they charge).
C'da gave a huge laundry list of things for a judicial reform. That
is all very good. In this particular case, the NCW has been able to drive
home the point of the importance of protecting women & children when
necessary.
Would you or C'da rather NOT have the court rule this way
On 2/15/06, Rajen
Barua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
Looks like National
Commission for Women which said all marriages have to be registered
irrespective of religion is the problem. Their intention may be all
good. But I put the Rs1000 only because the report does not say or think
anything about it. (Do you think it will be less than that?)
Somebody must think about the pros and cons. A Law may look good,
but if it is expensive to execute for millions of poor people, that Law
will not be implemented. Don't just think of the cities, think of the
villages. I don't see why all the villagers in India need to register
for every marriage simply to protect a tiny section of city dwellers
where this problem may be happening. Why a wife cannot get a
Certificate from a Gaw Burah in case of such requirement for the court?
I think our problem is the
Indian mindset.
RB
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, February 15,
2006 8:20 AM
Subject: Re: [Assam] Marriage
made at registrar's -Telegraph
C'da
I am proud of you Rajen.
Excellent questions!. Where have you been all these months and years,
NOT asking right questions like this ? But better late than
never.
He has always been here - you just didn't like his previous
questions? -:)
Barua,
>Who will pay for the
Rs 1000 Registration Fee + Attorney's Fee for the millions >of poor
citizens?
The news item doesn't say anything about Rs.1000 fees or
registration?
But your point is well taken.
So, now the question is:
Should reforms (in this case a judicial reform) NOT be undertaken
because down the line some unscruplous middlemen will make money? Or
stalled because of corruption exists?
If that is the case C'da, your frequent demands for 'reforms'
carry no direction. On the one hand you demand reforms, while on the
other you are saying these attempts at reform are "More empowerment
for corruption".
Reforms must go on, but corruption has to be battled on a
different front. Just because corruption is rampant, all
attempts at reformation can't be stopped.
--Ram
On 2/15/06, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
I am proud of you Rajen. Excellent questions!. Where have you
been all these months and years, NOT asking right questions like
this ? But better late than never.
***Looks like a
Bonanza for some middlemen to make money.
Exactly! More empowerment for corruption, while making attempts
at looking like doing something effective or useful!
c :-)
At 7:42 AM -0600 2/15/06, Rajen Barua wrote:
Who will pay for the Rs 1000 Registration Fee + Attorney's
Fee for the millions of poor citizens?
Will the couple will have to apear in the court for
registration?
Then another wait for court dates?
What are the scopes for loop holes and
corruption?
Looks like a Bonanza for some middlemen to make
money.
Does the registration mean some kind of identification of
citizens in state like Assam?
RB
----- Original Message -----
From: Ram
Sarangapani
To: ASSAMNET
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 12:09
AM
Subject: [Assam] Marriage made at registrar's
-Telegraph
At last, the courts have come in to make marriage
registration mandatory. Further, States (where registration
is not mandatory) have 3 months to get their act
together.
The Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955, empowers state governments to make registration
compulsory to facilitate documentary proof of marriages. The
act, however, makes it clear that non-registration should not
affect the validity of a marriage.
Under the Special
Marriage Act, 1954, which can be used by citizens of all
religions, registration is mandatory. Likewise, the Indian
Christian Marriage Act, 1872, provides for entry in the register
of the church where the union is solemnised. In the case of
Muslims, the nikaahnama records the terms of marriage. -
Telegraph
Obviously these did not
protect women and children, so the courts seem to made the apt
ruling.
This is interesting
stuff. What do netters think?
--Ram
______________________________________
Marriage made at registrar's
SINGH GYANANT KUMAR
New Delhi, Feb. 14: Marriages must be registered,
the Supreme Court ruled today in an order that seeks to protect
women as well as children and lay down the first uniform
guideline to regulate the cornerstone of the social system.
The court has directed the Centre and state
governments to make changes in rules to ensure that registration
of marriages is made compulsory. The order means Bengal, one of
the states where registration is not mandatory, has to amend
rules.
Justices Arijit Passayat and S.H. Kapadia gave the
Centre and states three months to comply with the directive. The
judges, who asked the governments to seek opinion from the
public, said the rules should spell out the consequences of
non-registration.
The ruling was based on a draft prepared by the
National Commission for Women which said all marriages have to
be registered irrespective of religion.
The court did not specifically mention whether all
religions will be covered - the details will be known once the
written order is made public.
The directive came on a petition regarding a
marriage dispute. The court enlarged the scope of the petition
and sought the views of the women's commission. In an affidavit,
the commission had said "non-registration of marriages affects
women the most".
NCW chairperson Girija Vyas said today's directive
would help check social evils like child marriage. Sri Lanka saw
a sharp fall in such marriages after registration was made
mandatory.
Vyas said the commission's draft bill provided for a
simple procedure which would neither interfere with personal
laws nor hurt religious sentiments. Qazis and pandits, she
added, have been given the power to register marriages.
She said the government should ensure there is a
uniform law throughout the country. Maharashtra, Karnataka,
Himachal Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh are among the states where
registration of marriages is compulsory.
The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, empowers state
governments to make registration compulsory to facilitate
documentary proof of marriages. The act, however, makes it clear
that non-registration should not affect the validity of a
marriage.
Under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, which can be
used by citizens of all religions, registration is mandatory.
Likewise, the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872, provides for
entry in the register of the church where the union is
solemnised. In the case of Muslims, the nikaahnama
records the terms of marriage.
Legal experts said the rule would also help courts
save time to prove the authenticity of a marriage, spare a
litigating spouse harassment and decide inheritance rights.
Advocate Abhishek Rai said several cases of "bigamy" ended in
acquittal because it was necessary for the wife to prove that
both the marriages were "valid and binding".
The experts said that living with a woman other than
the wife merely gave the latter a civil right to divorce and,
therefore, it was necessary to prove the fact of marriage to fix
criminal liability on a man.
![telegraphindia.co/19102583.gif]()
_______________________________________________
assam
mailing list
[email protected]
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
_______________________________________________
assam
mailing list
[email protected]
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
_______________________________________________
assam
mailing
list
[email protected]
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
|
