Government Notifies Domicile Rules for J&K

The Government notified Jammu and Kashmir Grant of Domicile Certificate (Procedure) Rules, 2020. These Rules prescribe the procedure for issuance of Domicile Certificate which has been made the basic eligibility condition for appointment to any post under the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir following amendments in the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Decentralization and Recruitment) Act, 2010.

Under the Domicile Rules all those persons and their children who have resided for 15 years in Jammu and Kashmir or have studied for seven years and appeared in class 10th or 12th examination in an educational institution in the UT are eligible for grant of domicile. 

Children of Central Government officials, All India service Officers, officials of PSUs and Autonomous body of Central Government, Public Sector Banks, Officials of Statutory bodies, Officials of Central Universities and recognized research institutes of the Central Government, who have served in the Union territory of Jammu of Kashmir for a total period of ten years will also be eligible for Domicile status in the UT.

Besides, all those migrants and their children who are registered with Relief and Rehabilitation Commissioner will be granted Domicile certificate.

Children of those residents of Jammu and Kashmir who reside outside the Union territory in connection with their employment of business or other professional or vocational reasons have also become eligible for grant of domicile status.

The rules provide a simple and time bound procedure for the issuance of the Domicile certificate so that no one is put to any inconvenience.

There shall be a timeline of 15 days for issuance of the certificate after which the applicant shall be free to approach an Appellate Authority.

The decision of the Appellate Authority shall be binding upon the issuing authority and the orders of the Appellate Authority are to be complied within seven days, failing which the defaulting officer shall be liable for a penalty of Rs 50,000 out of his salary. 

 

The appellate Authorities will also have revisional powers. They can, either suo moto or on through an application made, call for records, check the legality of any proceedings and pass appropriate orders in reference.

 

The rules have a provision that applications for grant of Domicile Certificate can be submitted either physically or electronically online. The Competent Authority can also issue domicile certificate(s) electronically.

              Requirement of Documents for granting Domicile of UT

Permanent Residents of the erstwhile State of J&K in whose favour Permanent Resident Certificate (PRC) has been issued by the competent authority before 31.10.2019 shall be eligible for receiving their Domicile Certificates on the basis of PRCs alone and no other additional document shall be required for such residents.

Kashmiri migrants can get the Domicile certificate on production of either a PRC or Certificate of registration of migrant. 

Further there may be bonafide migrants and bonafide displaced persons who have migrated but have not registered with the relief department. In order to facilitate such persons, the Relief Department shall be making a special limited provision to apply before the Relief & Rehabilitation Commissioner (Migrant), for registration for the purpose of issuance of a domicile  certificate only, with any one of the many documents such as

1)1951/1988 electoral roll,

2) proof of employment,

3) ownership of property,

4)proof of registration in other states/UTs as a migrant or a displaced person or any other documentation which would have made him/her eligible for grant of PRC before 06-08-2019.

 

As a result of the new rules and procedure,

  1. a) West Pakistan Refugees (WPRs), Safai Karamcharis living in state for 64 years but not permanent residents, Children’s and spouses of women married outside the state but lives in the state , Gurkha’s living in state for more then 150 years are eligible for Domicile Certificate.

West Pakistani Refugees were part of the Parliamentary electoral roll but not that erstwhile state electoral roll. They will now be covered under the 15 year residence rule or their children under the 7 year/ class 10/12 rule.

 

  1. b)  Similarly a simple procedure has been defined in the rules for other categories of people who are eligible for grant of Domicile Certificate as per Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Decentralization and Recruitment) Act. These include persons who have resided for a period of fifteen years in the Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir or have studied for a period of seven years and appeared in class 10th / 12th examination in an educational institution located in the Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir or children of such persons. These also include children of Central Government Official, All India Service Officers, Officials of Public Sector Undertaking and Autonomous body of Central Government, Public Sector Banks, Officials of Statutory bodies, Officials of Central Universities and recognized research institutes of the Central Government who have served in the Union territory of Jammu of Kashmir for a total period of ten years.

simple and easily available set of documents such as Ration Card, Immovable Property record, verified Education certificates, Electricity Bills or verified Labour Card/Employer Certificate, have been prescribed for obtaining the Domicile Certificate.

 

The Government has also constituted a Committee to accelerate recruitment to government vacancies and to ensure transparency, inclusiveness and speed and that the committee has been asked to identify the vacancies for being filled up on immediate basis with priority to Class IV vacancies. The Committee will also ensure that necessary sanctions are obtained, rules are notified and any hitches in the recruitment process are removed.

 

The process of issuing domiciles is simple transparent and fast and is explained below:-

 

  1. Permanent Resident Certificate Holder:Permanent Resident Certificate

 

  1. B) Children of persons possessing Permanent Resident Certificate:Permanent Resident Certificate of the parent; and Birth certificate issued by Competent Authority

 

  1. A person who has resided for a period of fifteen years in the Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir:Any document such as Ration Card: immovable property records: educational records: voter list: electricity utility bills: labour card; or, employer certificate verified by the Deputy Labour Commissioner or the Director Industries & Commerce of the Concerned Division; or, any other document of proof of residence and birth certificate issued by the competent Authority

Children of a person who has resided for a period of fifteen years in the Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir :

 

3) Students who have studied in the state for seven years and appeared in class 10th/12th examinations in educational institutions of Jammu-Kashmir UT:- Certificate of education issued by the Head of the Institute and verified by Chief Education Officer of the School Education Department of the concerned District

 

4) Migrants/ Children of Migrants Certificate of registration of migrant; Or Permanent Resident Certificate, if available and Birth Certificate

 

5) Children of Central Government officials, All India Service Officers, Officials of Public Sector Undertakings, Autonomous Body of Central Government, Public Sector Banks, Officials of Statutory bodies, Officials of Central Universities and recognised Research institutes of Central Government who shall have served in Jammu and Kashmir for a total period of ten years Certificate of service issued by General Administration Department/Cadre Controlling Authority and Birth Certificate issued by the Competent Authority

 

6) West Pakistan Refugees: They were hitherto not allowed the benefit of government jobs. They were part of the Parliamentary electoral roll but not that erstwhile state electoral roll. They will now be covered under the 15 year residence rule or their children under the 7 year/ class 10/12 rule.

7) Safai Karamcharies they too were not allowed the benefit of governmentt jobs. They will now become eligible under the 15 year residence rule or their children under the 7 year/ class 10/12 rule.

8) Women (erstwhile) resident married to non residents were also not eligible so far: They will also become eligible under the PRC/ children/residency rule.

9) All other migrant and displaced persons not covered so far will also be covered under the new rules/migrant order.

10) Gurkhas living in state serving in state forces at Maharaja’s times since 1840 but were denied status of Permanent residents.

 

The Three Kinds of Swadeshi

  • An Excerpt from Swadeshi and Boycott by Sri Aurobindo

” Now the meaning of Swadeshi and boycott, as we Nationalists understand them, is wider and larger than Swadeshi and boycott as defined by others, owing to the commercial and industrial circumstances of the country. There are three kinds of Swadeshi.  When Swadeshi was first started in Bengal, Lord Minto said at the Commercial Exhibition in Calcutta that he approved of Swadeshi. Our Swadeshi, according to Lord Minto, is the determination to encourage Indian manufacture and the use of Indian goods when they are as good as English manufactures and can be got at a cheaper price.  That is the economic principle preached by English economists. Lord Minto says that if Swadeshi excludes the goods of other countries it ceases to be an honest attempt for the industry of this country.

There is another kind of Swadeshi which is more developed. We shall encourage Indian labour, Indian manufacture, Indian articles, preferring our own goods by giving them a little stimulus. This idea of Swadeshi brings in the principle of preference and protection.

The third kind of Swadeshi adopts the principle of using our own Indian manufactures, our own Indian goods, and not using foreign articles if Indian articles can be had.”

Swadeshi and Decentralisation – Pt Deendayal Upadhyay

The concept of “Swadeshi” is ridiculed as old-fashioned and reactionary. We proudly use foreign aid in everything, from thinking, management, capital, methods of production, technology, etc. to even the standards and forms of consumption. This is not the road to progress and development. We shall forget our individuality and become virtual slaves once again. The positive content of “Swadeshi” should be used as the cornerstone Of reconstruction of our economy.

With the focus once again now on #Swadeshi & #Atmanirbharata, it is a good time to read what Pt. Deendayal Upadhyay wrote on this subject. Here is an excerpt from his  “Aspects of Economics”.

SWADESHI AND DECENTRALISATION

“SWADESHI” and “Decentralisation” are the two words which can briefly summarize the economic policy suitable for the present circumstances. Centralization and monopolization have been the order of the day for all these years, knowingly or unknowingly. The planners have become prisoners of a belief that only large-scale centralized industry is economic and hence without worrying about its ill-effects, or knowingly but helplessly they have continued in that direction. The same has been the case with “Swadeshi” The concept of “Swadeshi” is ridiculed as old-fashioned and reactionary. We proudly use foreign aid in everything, from thinking, management, capital, methods of production, technology, etc. to even the standards and forms of consumption. This is not the road to progress and development. We shall forget our individuality and become virtual slaves once again. The positive content of “Swadeshi” should be used as the cornerstone Of reconstruction of our economy.

DEPENDENCE ON WESTERN ECONOMICS

NOT only because of different ideals of life but also because of different conditions in terms of time and place the way of our economic development will have to be different from that of the West. But we are tied to Marshall and Marx. We believe that the economic principles they have discussed are eternal. Even those Who realise that they are dependent upon certain systems are not able to step out of their orbits. The economic prosperity of the West has created a blind belief in us about the Western system of production. Western economists have produced so much critical literature that we easily feel overwhelmed by it. We cannot rise above it. It is possible that this science of economics may have some principles that do not depend upon time, place or system and can prove useful to all, but very few have the capacity to assess this quality. Our education cannot create people with such a capacity. Our economists may be experts in Western economics, but they have not been able to make any solid contribution to it because the Indian economy can neither provide them the necessary thought nor the necessary field for experimentation.

NO RIGHT ETERNAL

NO fundamental rights, whether related to property or other things, are eternal. They are all dependent upon the interest of society. In fact these rights are given to the individual in order that he may perform his social duties. A soldier is given weapons because his duty is to protect society. If he does not do his duty he loses the right to bear weapons. Similarly the right to property is given to an individual so that he could do his duty by society. For this purpose it becomes necessary to define and modify these rights from time to time. No right to property is absolute of society.

RIGHT OF OWNERSHIP

THE right of ownership is actually the right to use a particular thing within definite limits and for a definite purpose. These rights keep changing with the times. Hence as a matter of principle we may not get entangled in the quarrel between the individual’s rights and the right of society. For us the State is not the only form of society. We believe that the individual, the family, the community, the State are all different forms in which society expresses and fulfils itself. The joint family is the practical unit in this country in which we seek to preserve the social sense in the individual, in which every individual has the right to earn, but the right of ownership vests in the family. Wealth is used for the benefit of the family. It is this Indian principle of Trusteeship that has been propounded by Gandhiji, Guruji and other thinkers.

OWNERSHIP RIGHT FOR WORKERS

IT is a matter of surprise that today a share-holder in joint stock companies, who has no other connection with the company except a share in its profit, should be able to exercise ownership rights while the worker who works in an industry, sets its machines into motion and depends upon it for his livelihood should experience a feeling of being a stranger to it. This feeling is not proper. It is therefore necessary that along with the share-holder the worker should be given ownership rights and a share in its management and profit.

RIGHT TO FOOD

THE slogan commonly heard now-a-days is “one must earn his bread”. Normally communists use this slogan, but even the capitalists are not fundamentally in disagreement with it. If there is any diflerence between them, it is only as regards who earns and how much. The capitalists consider capital and enterprise as important factors of production and if they take a major share of profit, it is because they think it is their due. On the other hand, communists believe only labour to be the main factor in production. Therefore they concede a major share of production to the labourers. Neither of these ideas is correct. Strictly speaking, our slogan should be that he who earns will feed and every person will have enough to eat. The right to food is a birthright. The ability to earn is a result of education and training. In a society even those who do not earn must have food. The children and the old, the diseased and the invalids, all must be cared for by society. Every society generally fulfils this responsibility. The social and cultural pro- guess of mankind lies in the readiness to fulfil this responsibility.

FOOD VERSUS FREEDOM

WHILE imports may help us tide over our present difficulties, the real solution to the problem lies in maximising agricultural production in the country. That we have not done sufficiently in this direction needs no saying. The present agreement is an eloquent testimony to the Government’s failure on this front. With the passage of time we have become increasingly dependent on foreign sources. We fear that due to availability of food in plenty at present the Government may become complacent in their efforts to raise production locally. The US Ambassador feels that America is following this policy only to let the struggling people of the democratic world realise that “there can be both freedom and food”. But what we want is our freedom and our food. That is possible only if we revive our old slogan of “Freedom from foreign food”. Dependence on foreign sources will impoverish and entangle us.

ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY

IF a vote for everyone is the touch-stone of political democracy, work for everyone is a measure of economic democracy. This right to work does not mean slave labour as in communist countries. Work should not only give a means of livelihood to a person but it should be of the choice of that person. If for doing that work the worker does not get a proper share in the national income, he would, be considered unemployed. From this point of view a minimum wage, a just system of distribution and some sort of social security are necessary.

  • Excerpts from Sri Deendayal Upadhyay on Aspects of Economics

 

Kanyā haraṇa in Itihāsa

Searching for victims of heroes in itihāsa is an old preoccupation of the enemies of the spirit of old lore (purāṇa vairi-s). That is a way of undermining the qualities that the civilization sees as heroic, and replace in collective psyche their images with icons of lower stature, representatives of qualities that prevent higher civilizational aspirations. While the enterprise is a big one, highlighting victims of heroes of epics helps (a) bring a doubt about their character and loftiness of the heroes (b) highlight defects in collective morality that sees the heroes as heroes.

When epics are not dominant in the collective consciousness, villains of epics can be directly highlighted as martyrs – Mahiśa, Rāvana etc. When epics come more into the fore, as happened recently during the lockdown thanks to the epics telecast on Doordarshan, villains of epics for their moral decrepitude cannot be highlighted by the purāṇa vairi-s because they then start looking like villains themselves.

Though for decades Rāvana was praised and Rāma was called an Aryan invader in some regions, now in most parts that line is not publicly acceptable – a rapist and an abductor of women cannot be called a martyr instead of a villain given the recent public anger for crime against women.

So the purāṇa vairi-s take to a different set of victims. Those that are not inherently negative characters but fell “victims” due to the poor moral compass of the heroes and society that produces those heroes. Sīta, Draupadi etc.

We learned recently that Subhadra was a victim of misogyny, forcefully taken away and married by Arjuna, and that her victimhood is not even mentioned in discourse. So it makes occasion to look at her case.

It is also a good occasion to look at kanyā haraṇa itself. Subhadra was not an isolated case of kanyā haraṇa, in fact kṣatriyas are “permitted” as an alternate method of getting wife, apart from the known brahma and gāndharva modes.

A simple survey of epics reveals easily, the fact that heroes of epics are men who always stood for protecting not just woman but woman’s right to make her choice. That becomes a topic in itself, so we can limit the current topic to kanyā haraṇa.

 

Dharma

Needless to say, it is not an appreciable practice to take a girl by force. Yet, it was a “permitted” thing for kṣatriyas. At this point it needs to be understood that smṛti/dharma ṣāstra is not prescriptive – it does not say “do this, do that”. It says “this is the nature of things, doing this has such result, and this is therefore the most doable or most avoidable thing”.

In that sense if seen, the dharma ṣāstras do not say “kṣatriyas should do this” but “it is a practice among kṣatriyas to do this”.

The different modes of marriage are mentioned in dharma ṣāstra texts. One instance is Manusmṛti (starting from verse 3.27). Brahma is the best mode of marriage. Arṣa, daiva prājāpatya are good modes where there is a family level agreement. Gāndharva is allowed for kṣatriyas where there is a mutual consent between the man and the woman, and no formal approval from parents is sought. Rakshasa is a discouraged mode where the girl is taken by force.

Why would such a marriage be allowed in a civilized society, and why it is sanctioned without prohibition? Why is no penalty imposed on the man? That too in a civilization that has practices  like swayamvara, where woman’s choice is given primary importance? There are multiple reasons for this.

  1. Ultimately it is the woman that is the loser. Bride has no legitimate status if the marriage is not legitimized. The girl can leave the man when she is freed, in case of abduction and captivity. The fate of a girl isolated after abduction is kept in mind, and therefore it is nevertheless listed a marriage while heavily discouraged.
  2. It is also possible that the abduction happens with girl’s consent. Though this is still haraṇa, it is still a right thing.

The possibilities in life are many, and when it comes to the question of which of the choices is “right” and which is not, the pedagogy of dharma  ṣāstras also gives us simple tests: any action that begets negative consequences is not in line with dharma. In cases where there are uphill tasks, facing lot of struggle and suffering but eventually results are positive, the choice is in line with dharma.

Yudhiśṭhira’s choices in dice game are shown to have negative results, and he is shown as expiating for his wrongs. So the lesson there is clear as to whether one should stake property and humans in a dice game, whether one should play without being adept, whether a game should be used to decide anyone’s fate at all.

Kanyā haraṇa episodes also have such lessons, in which case the choice has positive results and in which case it has negative results.

We know of at least three instances of kanyā haraṇa in itihāsa. First is Bhīśma taking the three princesses of Kāśī raja. Second is Kṛṣṇa taking Rukmiṇi. Third is Arjuna taking Subhadra.

These three happened in three different circumstances, and the merit and permissibility of kanyā haraṇa is different in all three.

 

Case 1 – Ambā (Adi Parva Section 102)

Bhīśma wanted brides for his brother Vicitravīrya. Given Vicitravīrya was not known to be a great prince, by character or power or charm, not many kings came  forward to give their daughters.

Bhīśma comes to know of Kāśī raja who announces a swayamvara for this three daughters Ambā, Ambikā and Ambālikā. There is no invite to Hastināpura. Bhīśma took a vow to remain unmarried and childless for life, and he was among the most eligible bachelors in Bharata. Vicitravīrya does not have a good name and gets no invite.

This angers Bhīśma, and he barges into the swayamvara, challengs the court to stand him in a battle if someone wants to stop him from taking the three brides for his brother Vicitravīrya, the heir of Hastināpura throne. Given Bhīśma’s standing as a warrior none could face him. Sālva king challenges Bhīśma to get Ambā his lover, and fails. Bhīśma comes to Hastināpura with the three princesses. Ambikā and Ambālikā get married to Vicitravīrya, soon to be widowed. Ambā reveals her love for Sālva and Bhīśma sends her to Sālva. Sālva having lost her in a fair fight, declines to own up Ambā.

Ambā is left nowhere. She demands that since Bhīśma used his power to get her from her father as well as her lover, he must marry her. Bhīśma is bound by vow, and declines. Then Ambā requests Bhīśma’s teacher Paraśurāma to persuade Bhīśma, he too fails. Ambā does tapas for Rudra, leaves her body, a part of her becomes Ambā river and another part takes rebirth as Sikhandi who becomes the cause of Bhīśma’s death.

This is a kanyā haraṇa, and the wrongs committed here are many:

  1. Woman belongs to the man who won her. This is itself  breached when Bhīśma used his power to win brides for his ineligible and incapable brother. A woman can live with a man who sought and won her, but not with a man who needs proxies to get her. It was not a case where Vicitravīrya sought the girls and stood, while Bhīśma’s power came to rescue.
  2. Bhīśma ignores the fact that Kāśī raja announced a swayamvara and not a contest. Unlike Draupadi or Sīta “swayamvara” which was more a contest and the girl goes to one who clears a test, Kāśī raja announced a self-choice where the girl picks the man she wants to marry. Bhīśma’s show of power to overrule a self-choice is the second wrong.
  3. When Sālva challenged Bhīśma, it does not occur to him whether Ambā could also have been interested. Ambā gets her chance to talk only after reaching Hastināpura.

Eventually since Bhīśma could not break his vow, Ambā’s life is ruined and she became the cause for Bhīśma’s death.

The lessons here are clear: one cannot forcefully take a woman when her interest is elsewhere. Show of power style representation is not acceptable for marriages. Given the negative consequences Bhīśma and Hastināpura has, this case of kanyā haraṇa, its method, motive all stand wrong.

 

Case 2 – Rukmiṇi  

Kṛṣṇa’s story is too famous, but a quick recollection helps conclusions. Vidarbha princess Rukmiṇi has Kṛṣṇa in her heart. Her brother Rukmi a friend of Kṛṣṇa’s enemies, is keen on getting her married to the man he likes and not the man his sister likes.

Rukmiṇi, intent on marrying Kṛṣṇa, sends a messenger. Agni Dyotana, a respected and  learned man, goes to Kṛṣṇa and conveys the longing Rukmiṇi has for Kṛṣṇa, the constraints she has and asks him to take Rukmiṇi from Vidarbha. Kṛṣṇa waits at the outskirts  of capital where Rukmiṇi comes to pray to her deity, comes on a chariot and takes her. The chariot is pursued by Rukmi, Kṛṣṇa stops and instead of killing his to be brother-in-law he shaves Rukmi and dispatches him back to Vidarbha.

This is a classic story of heroism, romance, love. It is not only read with great interest as a story, there is a practice in several regions to chant the episode by girls with the belief they will get married to a suitable and good man.

The antecedent and consequent are also clear: when the girl is interested, go to any length to get her. Yes, this too is a kanyā haraṇa – a stealing of Vidarbha princess from Vidarbha perspective. Yet this is always mentioned only in a positive sense.

 

Case 3 – Subhadra  (Adi Parva sections 221, 222)

Arjuna goes on an expiation exile and as part of it reaches Dwaraka. He sees Subhadra Kṛṣṇa’s sister, and has an instant attraction for her. Kṛṣṇa suggests that Arjuna abducts Subhadra and marries her.

Arjuna picks her, just like Kṛṣṇa picked Rukmiṇi, from outside the temple on a hilltop outside the capital. He reaches Indraprastha and their marriage happens. Yādavas in Dwaraka are enraged and Kṛṣṇa pacifies them saying Arjuna is the best possible groom they can ever hope to get for Subhadra, and they give their acceptance to the marriage.

The difference however, is this was not a case of girl taking the initiative. This was also not a case of Arjuna getting Subhadra’s acceptance before he takes her. This is also not an episode that is as celebrated as Rukmiṇi haraṇa.

Yet, we see no negative effects of this in the epic. It can be argued that since Subhadra knew Kṛṣṇa’s relation with Arjuna she had no hope of getting support and reconciled with life once she knew it was Arjuna who abducted her. This is not a valid argument, because the Yādavas including Balarāma were still around if she really wanted to protest. Yudhiśṭhira the Dharma raja himself would not approve of a match had Subhadra protested her abduction once they reached Indraprastha. To the contrary, it can be argued that Balarāma was in favour of Subhadra’s alliance with Hastināpura and Kṛṣṇa favored Arjuna as a friend and also as a better human and warrior. He sought a better man for his sister and suggested abduction because Subhadra did not make any decision. Possible arguments are many.

One question that arises in the latter argument is what happens to the consent of the girl. What is ignored while asking this question is when the consent did not matter (because the girl did not exercise it, not because the consent was overruled), what matters is getting the right man. Arjuna’s character throughout the epic is blemish less. He declines Ūrvaśī’s advances because he does not see in her a lover but an ancestor. He was the one to get whom as a son-in-law, kings conducted sacrifices and begot daughters. He declines marrying Uttara because he saw in her a student. A man of impeccable character, a man who knew exactly when to advance and when to stop, cannot be blamed for applying force on a woman without realizing where he could cross the line.

There are multiple versions in this story, and according to some accounts Kṛṣṇa advises Arjuna to abduct Subhadra. Some hold that Subhadra also had a liking for Arjuna and she went with him willingly, and was even driving the chariot. The implication in former version is that Arjuna abducted a lady who has not made up her mind (and was not against the alliance either) with the consent of her brother. The implication of the latter version is that this is another romantic story which is made out to be an issue for no reason.

But what is known is that Arjuna arranged for Subhadra’s meeting with Draupadi in a way their relation turns good. What is also known is that Subhadra is not known to have protested. What is also known is that Arjuna got a beautiful as well as affectionate wife in the form of Subhadra, and an illustrious son like Abhimanyu. There is no negative consequence coming out of this “stealing the girl” that came to Arjuna or Pānḍavās due to this that the epic narrates.

Because, unlike Bhīśma’s case, Arjuna wanted to win over his lady. Unlike Ambā’s case, this was also a great match – Arjuna was the best possible groom for a princess in that age, and had love for Subhadra. The bond between Kṛṣṇa and Arjuna, Arjuna’s character, every factor   was in favour of a happy marriage for Subhadra with Arjuna. Unlike Ambā’s case, Subhadra was also not having another man in her mind and was positively inclined to Pānḍavās due to Kṛṣṇa’s relation. From Subhadra’s viewpoint the only misgiving is not taking her acceptance, which, while being a major matter today, was hardly a big issue back then. When matches were arranged by elders barring exceptions, the boy and girl both go with the match arranged by parents. Given this, and given that Kṛṣṇa’s blessing was there, Subhadra had not a major reason to be unpleasant or express it.

 

Conclusion

While there are many other situations, these three reveal a fair diversity of kanyā haraṇa phenomenon along with their correctness, acceptability and consequences in the epic.

To conclude, kanyā haraṇa was not entirely proscribed because there were cases it had merit. At the same time, it was kept as one of the last chosen methods, to be resorted to after exhausting better ways and options.