New Delhi, Mar 6 (PTI) "It is a conflict between ''Bharat'' and India." This is how the Delhi High Court described a situation in which BSF authorities sacked a constable on charges of bigamy without recognising the divorce validated by a village panchayat.

The High Court rapped the BSF for not being "pragmatic" and taking a technical view by not recognising the divorce granted by the panchayat to Shiv Ram on the ground that it was not in consonance with the Hindu Marriage Act having a stamp of approval from the court of law.

"Another instance of conflict between India and ''Bharat''. The social norms in rural India are not accepting the changes which the legislature intends to bring. Hindu Marriage Act 1955!

"It is observed more in breach rather than in compliance in rural areas. The reason appears to be that the rural society is not in sync with the modern ethos which the city bred propagates," a bench headed by Justice Pradeep Nandrajog said, while ordering reinstatement of Shiv Ram.

"We allow the petition and quash orders (of Inquiry committees) and direct petitioner (Shiv Ram) to be reinstated.
Sans wages, he would be entitled to consequential benefits," it said, asking BSF to comply with the order in six weeks.

Shiv Ram, a resident of Chamba district in Himachal Pradesh, married a girl of a neighbouring village in 2000.

As differences cropped up, a village panchayat allowed them to separate and asked Shiv Ram to pay alimony to her.
Later, Shiv Ram''s first wife re-married and he also wed another girl.
However, his woes began when his second wife and her parents complained to BSF authorities accusing him of bigamy as his customary divorce was validated by a ''panchyat'' and not by a court of law.
The first court of inquiry, instituted by BSF, ordered his suspension by opining that though his second wife was not forced to marry, he will have to furnish a decree of divorce from a court of law as the panchayt order was invalid.

However, the second inquiry took a "technical" view saying the subsequent filing of divorce plea in the court established bigamy that he re-married during subsistence of his first marriage. It also ordered his sacking.

"The finding of the First Court of Inquiry is in harmony with the social realities in India. Its acceptance by the Commandant was correct. Petitioner was rightly advised to regularise the technical wrongs. We see no reason why the petitioner should be made to suffer," the bench said. (More) PTI SJK RKS ABA