A criminal has no religion. Recently, we have seen two cases of quite similar nature which shook the entire nation. The first one is the Shraddha Walkar murder case and the next one is the Aradhana Prajapati murder case from Azamgarh in Uttar Pradesh. In both the gruesome murder cases, the accused brutally killed their partners, and to cover up their crime, they chopped the dead bodies of the victims before disposing of it off. Though in both of the cases, the facts of the cases are different, the nature of the crime and the reason behind it is the same—that is problems around love relationships and marriage. In the Shraddha murder case, the victim was in a live-in relationship with Aaftab Poonawala. It was when Shraddha started pressurizing his partner for marriage that the issues between them escalated which led Aaftab to murder the victim. In the Azamgarh case, the victim was in a relationship with the accused, but she married someone else because of family pressure after which the accused was pressurizing the victim to break the marriage and settle with him. As the victim refused to do so, the accused, with his family members, murdered the victim. Marriage, since times immemorial, was considered to be a religious sacrament and a strict commitment between two persons in Indian society. As per Hindu mythology, it is a vow taken by two persons to continue their marital life for next seven births “Sath Janam key Sathi”. Earlier, there was no concept of divorce in the Indian culture but after independence when Hindu Marriage was codified through the Hindu Marriage Act, of 1955, the divorce system was brought to help the suffering partner come out of the bitter relationship in certain exceptional cases. But in the past few decades, it has been constantly noticed that divorce cases and crimes against women in marriage-related issues have steadily increased. This raises concerns in society about the sanctity and sacrament of marriage. With social transformation and advancement in technology, people, more specifically the youth, have become more intolerant and insensitive towards marriage and relationships. They think of it as a contract and not a sacrament. They take it for granted as if any time they can enter into it and if not satisfied, they will leave. For some, love only means sex. Most couples nowadays confuse lust with love. In many cases, it has been noticed that the other partner is treated as an object of satisfying their own lust. This is another important issue in today’s generation and is a societal concern. It has now become a moral and legal debate. With the change of time and adaptation of modern culture, live-in relationships are becoming more popular among the youth. The reason behind their popularity is to understand compatibility among the two persons. Live-in as per the Indian ethos is immoral, but as per the judiciary, it is not illegal and to protect the partner from any kind of abuse, legislation like the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 has been amended accordingly. Another important aspect which is noteworthy is that couples who are staying in live-in are not well accepted by their families, as for them, it is immoral to stay in cohabitations before marriage. It is one of the reasons where the youths don’t disclose about their abusive behavior of the other partner to their families. On many occasions, they just hide their live-in relation from others because of the societal taboo. The Shraddha case is an appropriate example to cite here where, although Shradha was the constant victim of abuse, due to parental non-acceptance of the live-in relationship with Aftab, she may have been forced to stay with him so that she could proof to her family that her decision of choosing Aftab was not wrong. In this case, Shraddha could have been saved if she was properly counselled by her friends and families so that she could rectify her decision of choosing an abusive partner by leaving that relationship. If she could have left the abusive relationship, she could have given her life another chance. We all are human beings and mistakes are part and parcel of our lives.
Coming to another case i.e the Azamgarh murder case, it was the responsibility of the family of the accused to counsel him properly instead of instigating him to commit a heinous crime. Denial of marriage proposals by a girl should not be treated as an insult or ego hurt. Nowadays, many young men seem to take no from a girl as an insult and they take it as a challenge to take revenge from her. This is an indication of intolerance in today’s youth. This is also an indication that society, till now, had bias among male and females. Every family should bring up their child, whether it’s male or female, in such a way that they should have a respect for every one feeling. In the Azamgarh case, if the girl could have communicated the pressure made by the accused on her family, she could possibly have been saved from the shocking murder. In this context, the relationship between the parents and children should be transparent and clear. Communication between parents and children must be strong. For that, spending quality time with family is the need of the hour which is not actually done. Even in the Shraddha case, the other flat-mates never enquired about the whereabouts of Shraddha from Aaftab as they all were busy with their lives. They never tried to talk to her whenever they heard noise from her flat. Somewhere, we all are responsible for the Shraddha and Azamgarh cases. Things which can be easily shortened with communication and counselling become exaggerated by hiding it from others. Family, friends, neighbors have an important role in everyone’s lives. One positive step taken by them could have changed the entire story of the cases and could have saved the lives of both. Parents ought to teach their boy child that a “no” from a girl is not an insult and every girl’s parents should teach them that if you have any issues, “we are with you, whether you are married or unmarried”.
Pyali Chatterjee is HOD, Faculty of Law, ICFAI University, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Neha Sharma is Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, ICFAI University, Raipur.
