Gujarat’s marriage rule changes risk honour crimes, deepen divisions: Civil rights groups

By A Representative 

Members of the National Alliance for Justice, Accountability and Rights (NAJAR - Gujarat) and the National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM Gujarat), along with several civil society organizations, have strongly objected to the proposed amendments to the Gujarat Registration of Marriages Rules, 2006, notified on 20 February, 2026. The groups have urged the State Government to withdraw the draft, citing grave concerns over constitutionality, privacy, and individual freedoms.

In a detailed letter of objections submitted to the Additional Chief Secretary, Government of Gujarat, Health and Family Welfare Department, the organizations stated that the proposed amendments introduce provisions requiring submission of Aadhaar details, mandatory disclosure of whether parents have been informed, and the sharing of parents’ contact information. Further, authorities would be required to notify parents of a marriage application and impose a 30-day waiting period before registration. The letter notes: “The requirement to ‘send intimation to the parents expeditiously’ is a blatant discrimination against adults choosing their partners… Such a right or choice is not expected to succumb to the concept of ‘class honour’ or ‘group thinking’.”

According to the organizations, these provisions are unconstitutional and violate fundamental rights, particularly the right to privacy, personal liberty, and individual autonomy. They argue that the amendments go beyond the scope of the parent legislation and impose unwarranted state intrusion into personal decisions of consenting adults. The groups warn that mandatory parental intimation could expose couples—especially those in inter-caste, interfaith, or socially sensitive relationships—to harassment, violence, and even “honour-based” crimes. The press note emphasizes: “Necessitating the involvement of the parents in the process of marriage registration can directly put people’s lives at risk.”

The amendments are also criticized for failing the proportionality test laid down by the Supreme Court in privacy jurisprudence, as they lack clear necessity, legal backing, and a rational connection to their stated objective. Civil society groups pointed out that there is no empirical evidence justifying such sweeping measures. Additionally, the proposal is seen as potentially deepening caste and religious divisions, discouraging inter-community marriages, and enabling misuse of laws such as the Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act through false complaints by disapproving family members.

The impact on women’s autonomy and LGBTQIA+ individuals has been highlighted as particularly concerning. The requirement of parental involvement could reinforce patriarchal control over women’s choices and further endanger queer and transgender individuals who often face familial violence and coercion. The letter warns that digitized, publicly accessible marriage records could also lead to misuse of personal information and threaten individuals’ safety and dignity.

In conclusion, the organizations stated that instead of addressing genuine concerns, the amendments risk discouraging marriage registration altogether, thereby undermining the very purpose of the law. “For the reasons stated above, the proposed amendments… violate the fundamental rights of individuals and are manifestly arbitrary and unconstitutional as it seeks to undermine individual choice and dignity.”

NAJAR (Gujarat) and NAPM (Gujarat) have called for the immediate withdrawal of the draft amendments and urged the government to uphold constitutional values, individual freedoms, and the right to dignity and choice.