New Delhi, February 22 – A surprising exchange between two experienced female professionals in their fifties briefly broke the tension in the busy newsroom. The argument mirrored the dramatic shirtless protest staged by Youth Congress members during the AI Summit.
While the newsroom was focused on covering the AI Summit on February 20, another story emerged from Gujarat. The state government proposed amendments to the Gujarat Registration of Marriages Act, 2006, which included a key provision that sparked considerable debate.
The proposal includes a declaration by the bride and groom, stating whether their parents are aware of the marriage.
This is more than just a declaration; the Assistant Registrar will notify both sets of parents within 10 working days, using the contact details provided in the application.
Furthermore, a 30-day period is proposed between the application and the issuance of the marriage certificate. During this time, details such as wedding photographs and witness information would be uploaded to a centralized state government portal.
The government is also planning a digital system through which parents would receive immediate notifications via WhatsApp and SMS when a couple applies for marriage registration.
The government claims this move safeguards parental sentiments and protects the rights of all stakeholders. However, the reactions on the ground remain sharply divided – much like the debate between the two journalists. While one supported involving parents, the other argued it would restrict freedom.
"What about freedom?" one journalist asked. "Don't parents have the right to know about their children's decisions? We are Indians. Family values are important in our culture."
Her colleague strongly disagreed. "This is regressive. It restricts individual freedom. Have we forgotten honour killings? Adults are capable of making their own choices."
"Parents deserve to know," the first insisted. "Our traditions have endured for centuries. Why import foreign notions of individualism?"
"That sounds dangerously rigid," the other replied. "Young people must have the freedom to choose whom they marry. We've seen how controlling families can be. This isn't about culture – it's about autonomy."
As the discussion appeared to be escalating, the two decided to continue later, as news about the shirtless protest by the Youth Congress members was intensifying.
Reportedly encouraged by party seniors, Youth Congress workers were being confronted by attendees who objected to their protest. Footage showed scuffles as visitors demanded they stop what they viewed as disruptive theatrics. By the time security escorted the protesters out, their clothes were torn, and their earlier defiance had given way to visible dejection. Walking slowly in torn clothes, they seemed dazed at the turn of events.
For the moment, the striking images from the summit overshadowed the proposed amendment. However, the implications of the Gujarat marriage law changes may prove far more enduring.
At its core lies a sensitive question: Do parents have the right to be informed if their adult children marry against their wishes? The issue is emotionally charged, often blurring the lines between tradition, personal liberty, social pressure, and safety. As reflected in the newsroom debate, public opinion appears firmly split.
When the Gujarat government introduced the proposal in the Assembly on February 20, it may not have anticipated that it would coincide with dramatic political protests. Nevertheless, the move has sparked broader conversations about inter-caste marriages, generational change, personal choice, and concerns of love jihad. In fact, the Gujarat government made a mention of the last one, which has stirred the Hindus in the state.
"Under the name of love jihad, a game is being played in the state" and "a strong armour… needs to be created for young girls", said Gujarat Deputy Chief Minister Harsh Sanghavi in the Assembly, adding that "if any Salim changes his identity and becomes Suresh to trap innocent girls, he will be taught a lesson".
With all the reasons behind the proposals to amend the Act, the country will surely see a debate over this. It affects families across social strata and directly concerns a generation, especially Gen Z, that places a high value on independence and self-determination.
The amendment seeks to institutionalize transparency and parental involvement. Whether Gen Z – and the generations that follow – will accept such oversight remains to be seen. The government has opened a 30-day public feedback window, and the coming weeks may indicate how strongly society feels on either side.
In the newsroom, the two journalists are still watching closely. Beyond the headlines and protests, the real story may unfold in homes, conversations, and choices yet to be made. If enacted, Gujarat's move could influence similar debates in other states – and test how India balances tradition with evolving ideas of individual freedom.
