[IAC#RG] In agreement with S. Sen

I appreciate the perspective offered in Shukla Sen's contribution to this issue. It is really absurd to flog this worn horse further.  It's a non- starter.  Marriage, according to several judgements in divorce cases in US and Europe laws, does not merely concern two individuals or even two families but the groom,  the bride,  and their society,  their shared or several community/communities. Forms of cohabitation without religious or legal acceptance are now recognised in common law,  including in India.

The purpose of codifying marriage and divorce rites in modern - Imperial British - Indian law was mainly to protect the estates and inheritance of the three parties involved and to determine the rights of the parties - of maintenance or compensation due to divorced spouses of the various communities.

Therefore,  whatever be the rites followed in the above sets of marriage and  death, and their reversal or appropriation by the several communities involved it will be impossible to untangle at this point of time the will and purpose of the actions of the three concerned parties.

I want to share what a senior  confidante and palace official of late King Birendra of Nepal,  Shri Renu Singh told me in 1980 : King Mahendra complained to  Nehru about his son wishing to marry out of caste and community,  to have in effect,  a 'love marriage'. Nehru said he had had the same problem with his only child Indira. He advised Mahendra, who is seen as a representative of Vishnu by 'Hindus',  to give up his clinging to past convention,  to caste,  tribe and  custom and let the children do as they wish. "Parents," Nehru allegedly said,  "can do nothing about this in these new times". (I may add that the woman Birendra wanted to marry actually refused his offer and went on to marry someone else,  also out of caste.)

So,  "the times,  they are changing," and S. Roy ought to give up his fascination for true or accurate descriptions of people's religion,  castes and  such affiliations,  particularly those of public persons. We are no longer in the age of Tulsidas's Ramayana when Ram had to abandon his lawfully married Mallika in the forest due to mere suspicion that she was sullied by captivity in the kingdom of Lanka.

Joya Roy