Legal loopholes

For now, Ravita Mehgwar, now known as Gulnaz Shah, the teenage Hindu girl who her parents say was abducted and forcibly married to a Muslim, will remain with her husband. A single bench of the Sindh High Court in Hyderabad was informed by Ravita and her husband Nawaz Ali Shah that they had married of their own free will. The case is, however, not a simple one and has stirred up a huge controversy within the Hindu community. In the first place there is the question of Ravita’s age. While papers presented to the court by the preacher who married the couple state that Ravita is 18 years old, this is contested by the counsel for her parents and the lawyer for the group that has taken up the matter. They cite school records to prove the matter. The Sindh Child Marriages Restraint Act passed in 2014 prevents the marriage of any person aged under 18, but as lawyers pointed out is silent about what the situation would be if the wedding is organised by the parents or the relative of a minor. This has been pointed out by lawyers questioning the marriage and the account provided by Ravita and her husband with the precedent of Anjali, another minor, provided. Anjali, under 18, was made to return home with her parents by the SHC in a case dating back after the Sindh law was passed.

An additional complication arises because the much touted Protection of Minorities Act 2016 passed by the Sindh Assembly which specifically forbade the conversion of underage Hindu girls was quickly thrown into disarray after religious groups protested its provisions. The law had been brought in as a result of growing protests from the Hindu community over the forced conversion of young girls and their marriage to Muslims. Hindu community leaders say hundreds of such conversions take place each year and the number is growing with certain men of religion playing an active role in organizing such marriages and conversions. The truth needs to be delved into a little deeper. If Ravita is indeed underage, as appears to be the case, under Sindh law as a child she cannot be wed. The questions of any loopholes in this law need to be examined urgently by experts. The government’s legal team too should be answering some questions about why such loopholes were left. It is also time the Sindh government starts taking the rights of minorities seriously. Had it not backtracked on the law to protect Hindus in 2016, the problem we face now may never have arisen. The use of possible coercion, force, threat, or fear to convert Ravita needs to be looked at and the case seen in the context of the broader social reality which has poisoned communities across Sindh, even in areas such as Thar where Hindus and Muslims had for decades lived in harmony.