[Reader-list] universal civil code

[A.K. Malik]

Dear Mr Taraprakash,
                    If you read thr' the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the Act applies to:
(a) to any person who is a Hindu by religion in any of of its forms or developments, including a Virashaiva, a Lingayat or a follower of the Brahmo, Prarthana or Arya Samaj;

(b) to any person who is a Buddhist, Jaina or Sikh by religion, and

(c) to any other person domiciled in the territories to which this Act extends who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew by religion, unless it is proved that any such person would not have been governed by the Hindu law or by any custom or usage as part of that law in respect of any of the matters dealt with herein if this Act had not been passed.
  2. You will see that it applies to Hindus and by definition also to Buddhists,Jains or Sikhs.Also applies to all others who are not  Muslims,Christians,Parsis or Jews.So even if  some one proves that he/she is not Hindu(but is not Muslim,Christian,Parsi or Jew), the Act will still apply to him/her.
Regards, 
 
(A.K.MALIK)


--- On Thu, 8/13/09, taraprakash <taraprakash at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: taraprakash <taraprakash at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] universal civil code
> To: "A.K. Malik" <akmalik45 at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "Sarai List" <reader-list at sarai.net>
> Date: Thursday, August 13, 2009, 9:41 PM
> Thank Mr. Malik  for this input,
> and also thanks Rakesh for forwarding the text of the act.
> 
> The point of discussion is that if a certain community
> wants not to be governed by this act and wants its members
> to follow the law of the "khat panchayat" should they be
> allowed on the line of the minorities who are allowed to
> have their personal civil codes? What if these communities
> do not want to be considered as Hindus?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "A.K. Malik" <akmalik45 at yahoo.com>
> To: "taraprakash" <taraprakash at gmail.com>
> Cc: "Sarai List" <reader-list at sarai.net>
> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:28 AM
> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] universal civil code
> 
> 
> > Dear Mr Taraprakash,
> >               
>      IN almost all the cases there is no
> legal bar on the marriages taking place. The Panchayats are
> putting their force on the young couples unnecessarily like
> a person can't marry a girl from the same village, same
> caste, same Gotra etc.The Hindu Marriage Act clearly defines
> where it is prohibited.The Govt in power just can't dare
> take any action because it is a very powerful and united
> community wtih lot of vote power which can make or mar the
> chances of a Govt formation especially in Haryana.
> > Regards
> > 
> > (A.K.MALIK)
> > 
> > 
> > --- On Wed, 8/12/09, taraprakash <taraprakash at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > 
> >> From: taraprakash <taraprakash at gmail.com>
> >> Subject: [Reader-list] universal civil code
> >> To: "Rakesh Iyer" <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com>,
> "Murali V" <murali.chalam at gmail.com>
> >> Cc: "sarai list" <reader-list at sarai.net>
> >> Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 5:51 PM
> >> I believe we need to have a greater
> >> debate on this issue. Khat panchayats
> >> have added a new dimension to the debate on Civil
> code.
> >> Should the jaats be
> >> forced to follow marriage related laws under
> Hindu
> >> Undivided Family act? I
> >> would love to hear some views on this.
> >> 
> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rakesh Iyer"
> <rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com>
> >> To: "Murali V" <murali.chalam at gmail.com>
> >> Cc: "sarai list" <reader-list at sarai.net>
> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 5:06 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Crime and No
> Punishment:
> >> Malegaon Blast
> >> AccusedGet a Respite
> >> 
> >> 
> >> > Dear Murali
> >> >
> >> > Great idea, provided:
> >> >
> >> > 1) The civil code will be introduced based on
> points
> >> of public discussion,
> >> > after having heard out all views, and
> implemented only
> >> if it is approved
> >> > through a referendum. All people of India
> must be
> >> involved, as it concerns
> >> > them in particular, and must be encouraged to
> bring
> >> their choice to public
> >> > notice through means of referendum.
> >> >
> >> > 2) The civil code must be looked at every
> 15-20 years
> >> to see if things
> >> > have
> >> > to be changed or not (in suit to current
> realities).
> >> For example, 20 years
> >> > ago gay rights may not have been supported to
> the
> >> extent they are today.
> >> > That has to be recognized. The code must also
> be
> >> debated upon periodically
> >> > (not necessarily for changing) and on
> special
> >> occasions if changes have to
> >> > be brought.
> >> >
> >> > Infact, such a civil code will be most useful
> to
> >> minorities, unlike the
> >> > way
> >> > it is portrayed by Muslim fundamentalists.
> And the BJP
> >> should be
> >> > criticized
> >> > for not having thought about it when they
> were in
> >> power (although what
> >> > form
> >> > would that code have taken is something
> speculative).
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> >
> >> > Rakesh
> >> > _________________________________________
> >> > reader-list: an open discussion list on media
> and the
> >> city.
> >> > Critiques & Collaborations
> >> > To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net
> >> with
> >> > subscribe in the subject header.
> >> > To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> >> > List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> >> 
> >> _________________________________________
> >> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and
> the
> >> city.
> >> Critiques & Collaborations
> >> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net
> >> with subscribe in the subject header.
> >> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> >> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
>