Celebratory firing at wedding kills groom in Haryana: High time this dangerous custom is brought to an end
Shots were fired at the wedding celebration of cricketer Ravindra Jadeja.
On December 30, a bridegroom died after being hit by a bullet fired to celebrate his marriage in Haryana's Kaithal district.
The local police said Vikram, the groom, was based in Switzerland and had come to India for his wedding. While the wedding party danced, a “close relative” was firing shots in the air, when someone brushed against him, making him lose his balance and shoot the groom.
A day before, on Friday, a 15-year-old boy landed up at a Delhi hospital after two bullets, fired as part of a wedding procession, hit him.
In November, a seven-year-old boy died in celebratory firing during a wedding in Punjab’s Faridkot district.
Incidents abound in India of people dying or sustaining serious injuries after being hit by bullets fired in celebration.
Celebratory firing is illegal – the Arms Act, 1959 says that arms should not be used as a "weapon of assault" or "status symbol", but only for self-defence. Also, carrying a gun in a public place, unless it is properly sheathed in holders, is an offence.
Yet, the practice of firing shots in the air to celebrate an occasion, especially weddings, is all too common in many Indian states, including Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan. So what drives the custom and what does the law say about it?
Why the custom
Wielding a gun, of course, is a marker of caste, wealth and social status. In Bihar, where celebratory firing is socially acceptable, stories have it that the practice of wedding revellers carrying arms began as defence strategy – the baraat (the groom's wedding procession) often had to travel a long way late in the night. It was bound to have well-dressed, bejewelled people, making them easy targets for dacoits, and so it made sense for the revellers to be armed.
There are caste markers everywhere in the custom – only upper castes would have baraats travelling long distances, and laden with enough riches to tempt dacoits. Also, the Rajput community, when dressing up in full traditional regalia – like for a wedding – would carry a sword almost as part of their costume.
Over time, the swords were replaced with firearms, and wealth, not just caste, decided who carried them (even today, the wealthier are more likely to be “forward” castes).
While no longer necessary for self-defence, they became markers of social status – no bade aadmi’s (VIP's) marriage was complete without some people carrying firearms, and his stature was proclaimed loudly and proudly by firing shots in the air. Anyone aspiring for social standing perforce followed this code, and for lower castes, it became a symbol of assertion, of equality with the upper castes.
A gun is a status symbol in multiple ways – politicians, small-time gangsters, construction contractors, all move about with a posse of armed guards. Bollywood and its "dabanng" heroes have played a part in glorifying gun culture. And of course, it is very cool and macho to wield firearms.
The law
India has one of the strictest gun licence laws in the world. One can apply for a gun for three purposes – crop protection, self-defence and sports – and the process requires filling out forms, character certificates from “responsible citizens”, and basic knowledge of handling a firearm. Even air guns, blank-firing guns and paintball guns need licences.
There are two problems with this.
First, owning a gun becomes easier if you are “well-connected” politically, or are rich enough to bribe officials. Thus, a firearm becomes a double marker of status, and carrying it a greater matter of pride.
Second, the strict rules mean there is a thriving market of illegal arms, where anyone can buy guns, no questions asked.
According to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), 3,655 people were murdered with guns in India in 2014, of which 3,115 (85 per cent) were killed by unlicensed arms.
While AK-47s and other sophisticated guns are also available in these illegal markets, albeit at very steep prices, the cheaper, and hence the more popular, are the country-made variety – kattas and tamanchas. These often bypass safety specifications during manufacturing, and are wont to malfunction, including backfiring.
In rural areas, these are the guns more likely to be used for celebratory firing. Wedding guests are often inebriated, and poorly manufactured guns in the hands of drunken men are an obvious recipe for disaster.
A Delhi court, while sentencing a man to jail for accidentally killing the groom’s uncle in a case of celebratory firing, had observed in 2015: “Firing with guns and pistols during marriage processions has become a sort of fashion... This is proving to be a killer for innocent fellow-baraatis and even onlookers. It’s high time that government tightened the procedure for grant of arms-licence and also evolves a robust mechanism to ensure that these licences are not misused.”
In September 2017, the Delhi High Court had asked the Centre and other authorities to frame a policy within three months to curb the practice of celebratory firing. The court was acting on a PIL filed by a tea vendor, Shyam Sunder Kaushal, whose daughter died in April 2016 after she was hit by a bullet fired at a wedding procession she had been watching from her house along with her sisters.
The three-month period ended in December, but so far, there have been no reported developments on this.
The government, thus, has its task cut out – it needs to crack down on the illegal manufacture and sale of firearms, and regulate how they are carried in public places.
However, this alone is not enough to prevent tragedies such as Saturday’s. A mentality shift in the society is also required.
A wedding is about the union of two people, and in no way do the celebrations require other guests proving their machismo. Till the time such brazen assertion of dominance is considered socially acceptable, even commendable, innocent people will keep falling to bullets fired out of someone’s misplaced sense of pride.