New Delhi: The term ‘sahvas sambandh‘ as the Hindi translation of “live-in relationship” in the Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code has become a bone of contention in the state.
While the Congress is protesting the “validation of live-in relationships” and the ushering in of “Bangkok culture” through the UCC and its use of ‘sahvas sambandh‘, some BJP leaders called for fine-tuning the term, arguing that it harms the reputation of Uttarakhand and could negatively impact its society and public sentiments.
The UCC rules in Uttarakhand came into force on 2 January this year, making it mandatory for live-in couples to register with the state government. Failure to register is punishable by up to six months in jail. The requirements for live-in couples are many—from submitting a lengthy form and fees to making a religious leader give them a certificate saying they can marry and having to share past relationships.
While civil society groups have cited the invasion of privacy to challenge the UCC rules in court, a new storm is brewing over the Hindi text of the UCC referring to live-in relationship as ‘sahvas sambandh’.
Different terms represent marriage traditions in the UCC—”ashirvad” for Parsi marriages, “anand karaj” for Sikh marriages, “mangal fere” for Jain marriages, “nikah” for Muslim marriages, “nissuin” for Jewish marriages, “pakton” for Buddhist marriages, “saptapadi” for Hindu marriages in the Hindi and English versions of the rules and, for Christian marriages, “pavitra milan” in the Hindi version and “holy union” in the English.
However, it is ‘sahvas sambandh‘ that has led to protests by the Congress.
Party state president Karan Mahara told ThePrint, “We oppose live-in relationship promotion through the UCC. What is more concerning is whether the BJP government wants to introduce ‘Bangkok culture’ into Uttarakhand by using such a term. ‘Sahvas‘ is a word most families in Uttarakhand do not openly discuss. The state is known as ‘dev bhoomi’, and our customs and culture do not allow people to speak openly about such matters.”
During a recent review of the UCC, BJP leaders also flagged the term ‘sahvas’.
Speaking to ThePrint, BJP general secretary Mohan Bisht commented: “We’ve received feedback expressing concerns about the word ‘sahvas’ in the rules, as Uttarakhand’s society is not as open as in larger cities. Most people here speak Hindi, and the word could hurt their sentiments. These concerns have been conveyed to the appropriate authorities. They are working to address them.”
Officials who helped draft the UCC argued that there was no direct translation of live-in relationship in Hindi. One official involved in the process told The Print that ‘sahvas sambandh‘ was the most appropriate term as it meant cohabitation without a marriage. Live-in couples, officials said, should not be offended by its use.
Academics also weighed in on the debate, with Harish Chand Tiwari, associate professor at Uttarakhand Sanskrit University, criticising the use of ‘sahvas sambandh‘ for live-in relationships.
Tiwari said that ‘sahvas‘ historically referred to cohabitation in a gurukul for studies and had nothing to do with sexual relations. He argued that using ‘sahvas sambandh‘ for live-in relationships distorted the original Sanskrit meaning and suggested that officials relied on a Wikipedia translation.
Professor Gopabandhu Mishra of Banaras Hindu University echoed his concerns, saying ‘sahvas‘ was traditionally used to describe non-sexual cohabitation, such as a father and son or siblings living together. He called applying it to live-in relationships “inappropriate” and “misleading”.
In the Sanskrit word ‘sahvas’, ‘sah’ means together and ‘vas’ means live.
To ensure women’s safety?
Addressing the controversy around the term ‘sahvas sambandh’, a BJP vice president told ThePrint, “The focus on live-in relationships is not helping the party. The main aim of the UCC is to empower women and ensure their safety. However, the constant discussion on live-in relationships overshadows other important aspects of the UCC. Our society is not as open (liberal) as cities such as Delhi or Mumbai, where such topics are less embarrassing. Over-emphasising this issue is not benefiting the party.”
The growing concerns on the issue was reflected in Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami’s statement at a press conference on Thursday, when he acknowledged that live-in relationships were not a part of Uttarakhand’s culture. However, citing cases where such relationships ended in violence, he stressed the government introduced the registration to ensure women’s safety.
Referring to the infamous 2022 murder of Shraddha Walker in Delhi by her live-in partner Aftab Amin Poonawala, Dhami said, “Congress is spreading misconceptions about the UCC because it does not believe in Ambedkar’s Constitution and seeks to protect those who commit atrocities against women.”
The ruling government has repeatedly clarified that the purpose of registration of live-in relations was to protect women’s rights, but civil society members have continued to voice concerns. Besides the privacy violations involved, with the couple having to inform the registrar, the police, and their landlord about their relationship, civil society members have said the requirement for a certificate from a priest would discourage inter-caste and interfaith relationships.
(Edited by Madhurita Goswami)
Also Read: Uttarakhand UCC will make it easier for live-in couples to find houses: Implementation panel chief
