Reader TTS

The __khap___ panchayats_ (caste/community councils) of Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh rallied in support of the wrestlers. On what basis, though? The photographs are revealing: at every

event, male _khap_ leaders have their hands placed on the head of a woman wrestler: a patriarchal elder is blessing a daughter of the community. And that same hand might turn violent if the

‘daughter’ asserts her autonomy in matters of love and marriage. The ‘Sarva Khap’ General Secretary _Subhash Baliyan_ supported the wrestlers, saying, “We can’t leave our daughters in the

lurch.” But with the same zeal he had rejected the Supreme Court verdict against the _khaps_’ involvement in _‘honour’ crimes_, saying, “We can’t accept marriages in same ‘gotra’ or village

as it is a centuries-old tradition started by our forefathers.” His brother _Naresh Tikait_ had, on behalf of his _khap_, announced a ban on the use of mobile phones by young people. Their

father the late _Mahendra Singh Tikait_, a well-known farmers’ leader and chaudhury of the Baliyan _khap_ in 2009, went further. He said, “Love marriages are dirty, I don’t even want to

repeat the word...Only whores can choose their partners. Education has contributed to this dirt. Recently an educated couple married against the samaj (community’s) wishes in Jhajjar. We

hail the panchayat’s decision to execute them.” Asked about the Constitutional rights of individuals, and women, he said “That’s your Constitution, ours is different.”  Are movements against

sexual assault a defence of Constitutional rights? Just as movements against ‘honour’ crimes, moral policing and laws restricting inter-faith marriages and live-in relationships? To what

extent can we celebrate the farmers’ movement as a democratic triumph and hail its support for the wrestlers’ struggle, if some of its most prominent leaders reject the Constitution exactly

as Hindu supremacists do?     _(Kavita Krishnan is a women's rights activist. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor

is responsible for them.)_