Gotra Trouble Again: The Dark Undercurrents of Haryana’s Social Order

— By Ramphal Kataria

Educated Yet Enslaved: The Ahirwal Dilemma

 

The 2009 Manethi village case of Sunil Yadav and Sarla Yadav reveals how gotra taboos and feudal mindsets still dominate Haryana’s social fabric. Despite education and economic progress in south Haryana’s Ahirwal belt, village elders sought to annul a consensual marriage, echoing khap-style interventions from central and western Haryana. This episode underscores the enduring clash between constitutional freedoms and patriarchal social control.

On December 6, 2009, The Tribune reported a disturbing story from Manethi village, 25 km from Rewari. A young couple, Sunil Yadav (22) and Sarla Yadav (21), solemnized their marriage in a temple on November 13, 2009, exercising their free will and legal right to marry. What should have been a simple, joyous occasion soon turned into a test of survival. Agitated elders convened a panchayat meeting to devise ways to dissolve the marriage, citing violation of gotra norms [The Tribune, Dec 6, 2009].

South Haryana’s Distinct Identity — And Its Similar Rot

This case is significant because it did not emerge from the Jat-dominated heartland of central Haryana (Rohtak, Jind, Sonepat) or western Haryana (Hisar, Bhiwani), but from Ahirwal — the Yadav-majority tracts of Rewari and Mahendergarh in south Haryana.

For decades, Ahirwal has prided itself on producing soldiers, technocrats, agricultural scientists, and educated professionals. Villages like Manethi symbolize this progress. Yet, the incident reveals an uncomfortable truth: the psyche of social control remains strikingly similar to the Jat belts. Beneath the veneer of education and economic mobility lies the same feudal-patriarchal mindset that subordinates personal liberty to community honor.

The Gotra Taboo: Old Wine in a New Bottle

The opposition to Sunil and Sarla’s marriage hinged on the belief that their union violated gotra exogamy norms. Such prohibitions have long been enforced by khap panchayats, especially among Jats, but resonate across other communities as well.

By 2009, the infamous Manoj–Babli case (2007, Kaithal district) had already become a national reference point: the couple was brutally murdered for marrying within the same gotra. In March 2010, a Haryana court sentenced five accused to death in that case [BBC, Mar 30, 2010]. The Manethi incident, though less violent, proves that the infection of social authoritarianism was not confined to one caste or region.

The Role of Panchayats and Silence of the State

What made the Manethi case more disturbing was the role of numberdars and elected panchayat members, who joined elders in seeking dissolution of the marriage. Instead of upholding constitutional values, they became instruments of coercion.

Equally worrying was the silence of the administration. State authorities, despite their constitutional duty to safeguard fundamental rights, remained mute spectators. This abdication mirrored earlier failures in cases where couples had been harassed, attacked, or even killed in the name of “honor” [Los Angeles Times, Sep 2009].

Comparing Central, Western, and Southern Haryana

Central Haryana (Rohtak, Jind, Sonepat): Khap panchayats regularly issued diktats against intra-gotra and intra-village marriages, with reported cases of honor killings [The Tribune, 2009].

Western Haryana (Hisar, Bhiwani): Similar practices of khap intervention, often violent, were common.

Southern Haryana (Rewari, Mahendergarh): Though Yadavs dominate instead of Jats, the Manethi case proved that the patriarchal mindset is no different.

Thus, while demography differs, the character of rural Haryana society is uniformly intolerant of self-choice marriages.

A Stark Contrast and a Call for Introspection

The Manethi episode exposes a painful paradox: a village known for sending its sons to universities and the armed forces, yet unable to accept two adults exercising the freedom to choose each other. Education and economic progress co-exist with medieval attitudes.

Nothing could be more unjust than pressuring a couple to annul a marriage sanctified in a temple. It violates not just constitutional rights but also basic human decency.

The incident compels Haryana to ask: Will we continue to let self-styled social lords dictate the most private decisions of young adults? Or will we affirm the values of liberty and dignity promised by the Constitution?

The story of Sunil and Sarla in November–December 2009 is more than a local dispute. It is a reminder that the struggle for personal freedom in Haryana is ongoing — and that progress is hollow if love itself is chained by feudal control.

References

1. The Tribune. “Gotra Trouble Again: Village elders seek to undo the knot.” December 6, 2009. [Report from Rewari on Sunil Yadav and Sarla Yadav’s marriage dispute].

2. BBC News. “Death for India ‘honour killers’.” March 30, 2010. [Coverage of Manoj–Babli case in Kaithal, Haryana].

3. Los Angeles Times. “In India, arranged marriage rules are enforced with violence.” September 2009. [International coverage on honor killings and khap diktats in Haryana].

4. The Tribune (2007–2009 archives). Multiple reports on honor killings and khap panchayat diktats in Rohtak, Jind, and Hisar districts.

 

 

Haryana’s Caste Hypocrisy: When the Oppressed Become Oppressors

From Siwaha’s lower-caste diktat to Dalit sub-classification politics, Haryana reveals how feudal patriarchy and caste rigidity still dictate young lives.

This blog examines the persistence of caste rigidity and patriarchal codes in Haryana, focusing on how Scheduled Castes, once oppressed, now replicate the same feudal behaviours historically used against them. The Siwaha incident, where a Dalit couple was ordered to dissolve their marriage, highlights the internalisation of khap-style authority among lower castes. The analysis extends to the political manipulation of caste through reservation, particularly after the Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling in Davinder Singh, which allowed sub-classification of Scheduled Castes. Haryana’s politics has exploited these divisions, splitting Chamars and non-Chamars for electoral gain. Drawing on landmark Supreme Court judgments from Champakam Dorairajan (1951) to Janhit Abhiyan (2022), the piece argues that caste remains the most potent instrument of social control and political mobilisation. Unless society breaks this cycle and returns reservation to its core mission — education, dignity, and opportunity — Haryana will remain trapped in its contradictions.

Haryana is a state known for its hardworking people. Yet beneath the surface of industry and progress lies a darker truth: caste rigidity remains a relentless force. For centuries, this land of wars and migrations has cultivated a society where community identity, not individual freedom, determines destiny. And while much has been written about khaps and upper-caste conservatism, the uncomfortable reality is that Scheduled Castes (SCs) too are increasingly mirroring the same feudal and patriarchal values once used to suppress them.

The Siwaha Incident: A Mirror to Society

In early December, 2009, Siwaha village in Panipat district witnessed an ugly spectacle. A young Scheduled Caste couple, having solemnized their marriage, were ordered by local leaders to either dissolve their union or face the consequences.

What makes this case striking is not merely the cruelty — Haryana has seen too many such diktats — but the identity of the enforcers. These were not upper-caste khap elders, but influential members of the lower social strata, replicating khap-style authority to project themselves as community guardians.

This hypocrisy is telling. Leaders who rail against upper-caste domination are now aping its worst features. By policing love and marriage, they signal both power and “honour” within their groups, even at the cost of young lives. Women, as always, become the first casualties of such patriarchal enforcement.

Feudal Values Across Castes

The Siwaha episode is not an aberration. It illustrates how feudal and patriarchal values transcend caste lines. Haryana’s Scheduled Castes, historically victims of discrimination, have themselves internalised the same rigid codes. Intra-gotra and intra-village marriages are policed with the same severity in Dalit households as in Jat or upper-caste ones.

This is not just social conservatism; it is the replication of a control mechanism. Lower-caste elites use it to assert authority over their communities. In doing so, they imprison themselves within the very mindset that once excluded them.

Reservation and the Politics of Division

The paradox extends from the village to the statehouse. Reservation, conceived as a tool of social justice, has become another arena of caste fragmentation. Over the years, the Supreme Court has tried to balance equality with special provisions:

Champakam Dorairajan (1951): Struck down communal quotas; led to the First Amendment adding Article 15(4), enabling special provisions for backward classes and SC/ST.

Indra Sawhney (1992) upheld OBC quotas but introduced the “creamy layer” exclusion. 

M. Nagaraj (2006) and Jarnail Singh (2018) insisted that promotions for SC/STs be justified with data.

Janhit Abhiyan (2022) upheld the 10% EWS quota, weakening the 50% ceiling.

State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh (2024): Allowed sub-classification of SC/ST to ensure equitable distribution. Suggested even SC/ST may face creamy-layer type exclusion if dominant groups corner benefits. Stressed the need for empirical evidence and rational criteria to avoid political misuse.

This last judgment has seismic implications in Haryana. Here, caste segmentation within Dalits — Chamars vs. non-Chamars already runs deep. By permitting sub-classification, the Court has armed politicians with a sharper tool for dividing SC communities.

Indeed, Haryana wasted no time. Acting on the advice of the state’s Scheduled Caste Commission, it moved to categorise SC reservations, consolidating non-Chamar votes under the BJP while leaving Chamars aligned with the Congress. The rhetoric of justice thus masks a familiar game: fragment to consolidate power.

When Oppression Becomes a Tool

The result is tragic irony. Instead of uniting against entrenched inequalities, Dalit communities are turned against one another. Reservation benefits flow disproportionately to dominant SC sub-groups, fuelling resentment among others. The cry of “Scheduled Caste A” versus “Scheduled Caste B” has drawn permanent lines of separation, eroding solidarity.

Meanwhile, education and job opportunities — the real levers of empowerment — remain scarce. The political class thrives on managing identities rather than delivering development. As one analyst quipped, “The ball is thrown for non-existent posts in the playground.”

A Politics of Hypocrisy

From the khap-like diktats in villages to the reservation chessboard in Chandigarh, the message is consistent: caste remains Haryana’s most manipulable currency. And hypocrisy abounds. Leaders denounce upper-caste oppression while enforcing their own brand of patriarchal discipline. Parties invoke social justice while using quotas to split communities. Even the Prime Minister, in seeking connection, identifies not as a citizen but as an OBC.

This is not empowerment — it is entrapment. A society that measures itself by caste purity and patriarchal codes cannot claim progress, no matter how high its GDP or how many medals its athletes bring home.

Breaking the Cycle

The question is whether right-thinking people will stay silent. Will ordinary Haryanvis, living in today’s India, register their anguish at seeing young couples punished for love? Will Scheduled Castes recognise that adopting the worst traits of feudalism only reinforces their own chains?

The Siwaha case offers a warning: oppression, once internalised, reproduces itself endlessly. If the oppressed become oppressors, society does not move forward — it merely shifts the weight of its chains.

The way out lies not in further fragmentation but in reclaiming the original spirit of reservation — to level the playing field through education, dignity, and opportunity. It lies in dismantling patriarchal codes, not reinforcing them. Above all, it lies in remembering that caste, whether invoked by khaps or Dalit elites, is the enemy of individual freedom.

Until then, Haryana will remain trapped in its contradictions — a land of hardworking people shackled by the hypocrisy of its own traditions.

References

1. State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan, AIR 1951 SC 226.

2. Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217 (Mandal Commission case).

3. M. Nagaraj v. Union of India, (2006) 8 SCC 212.

4. Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta, (2018) 10 SCC 396.

5. Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India, (2022) 10 SCC 1 (EWS quota).

6. State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh, (2024) 7-Judge Constitution Bench judgment.

7. Satish Deshpande, Caste Matters in Public Policy, Economic & Political Weekly, 2013.

8. Ghanshyam Shah, Caste and Democratic Politics in India, Permanent Black, 2002.

9. Christophe Jaffrelot, India’s Silent Revolution: The Rise of the Lower Castes in North India, C. Hurst & Co., 2003.

10. Haryana Scheduled Caste Commission Reports (various years).

11. News reports on the Siwaha (Panipat) incident, Dainik Bhaskar and The Tribune, December, 2009.