General Studies 2024 GS Paper I 10 marks 150 words Compulsory Discuss

Q9

Intercaste marriages between castes which have socio-economic parity have increased, to some extent, but this is less true of interreligious marriages. Discuss. (Answer in 150 words) 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

समान सामाजिक-आर्थिक पक्ष वाली जातियों के बीच अंतर्जातीय विवाह कुछ हद तक बढ़े हैं, किन्तु अंतर्धार्मिक विवाहों के बारे में यह कम सच है। विवेचना कीजिए। (उत्तर 150 शब्दों में दीजिए)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2024 General Studies questions

Directive word: Discuss

This question asks you to discuss. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'discuss' requires presenting multiple perspectives on why intercaste marriages with socio-economic parity have risen while interreligious marriages lag. Structure: brief introduction acknowledging the differential trend → body examining factors driving intercaste acceptance (education, urbanization, economic mobility) versus barriers to interreligious marriages (religious endogamy, conversion anxieties, legal complexities, communal politics) → conclusion with policy/way forward.

Key points expected

Recognition that intercaste marriages are increasingly common among similarly educated/employed castes (e.g., urban upper-middle class)
Explanation of how socio-economic parity reduces caste-based status anxiety and parental opposition
Analysis of why religious identity poses stronger barriers than caste—scriptural injunctions, community endogamy norms, fear of conversion/religious dilution
Reference to legal dimensions: Special Marriage Act, 1954 usage vs. Hindu Marriage Act; anti-conversion laws in states like UP, MP, Gujarat
Mention of 'Love Jihad' narrative and its chilling effect on Hindu-Muslim marriages specifically
Brief note on regional variation (higher intercaste rates in South India, lower interreligious nationally)

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	2	Clearly distinguishes between 'discuss' requirements—presents both sides of the differential trend with balanced treatment of why one increased and other stagnated; avoids mere description or one-sided argumentation	Addresses both marriage types but treats them sequentially without explicit comparative analysis; partial grasp of 'discuss' as requiring multi-factor examination	Misreads directive as 'describe' or 'explain' only one aspect; treats intercaste and interreligious as identical phenomena or ignores the contrast entirely
Content depth & accuracy	20%	2	Accurately identifies socio-economic parity as key enabler for intercaste marriages; correctly distinguishes religious endogamy, conversion anxieties, and political mobilization as distinct barriers for interreligious unions; uses precise sociological concepts (homogamy, endogamy, communalism)	General awareness of trends but conflates caste and religion barriers; vague references to 'tradition' or 'conservatism' without specificity; minor factual errors on legal provisions	Fundamental misunderstanding—claims interreligious marriages have also increased significantly, or attributes caste persistence solely to rural backwardness without acknowledging urban castelessness limits
Structure & flow	20%	2	Tight 150-word discipline with clear thesis in opening; parallel structure comparing intercaste (drivers) vs. interreligious (barriers); smooth transitions between economic, social, and political dimensions; integrated conclusion	Readable but uneven weightage—overdeveloped intercaste section with rushed interreligious treatment; or list-like without analytical progression; minor word count deviation	Disorganized—no clear separation between the two marriage types; abrupt shifts; exceeds word limit significantly or severely underwrites; missing conclusion
Examples / case-law / data	20%	2	Specific illustration: NFHS-5 data on intercaste marriage prevalence (~10% nationally, higher in urban educated); Special Marriage Act reference; state-level anti-conversion law examples; iconic cases like Hadiya (2017) or Shakti Vahini v. Union of India (2018) on honor killings	Generic reference to 'recent surveys' or 'Supreme Court judgments' without naming; mentions 'Love Jihad' without legal context; no quantitative anchor	No examples whatsoever; invented statistics; confuses SC/ST intermarriage incentives with general intercaste trends; irrelevant international comparisons
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	2	Synthesizes that economic rationality overcomes caste but identity politics hardens religious boundaries; suggests policy—sensitization campaigns, SMA implementation reform, or counters 'Love Jihad' laws with constitutional morality (Navtej Singh Johar/ Puttaswamy principles)	Routine summary restating points; platitudinous 'need for education and awareness'; no forward-looking element or fresh insight	Missing conclusion; or abrupt ending with personal opinion; contradicts own argument; suggests impractical solutions like 'abolish all personal laws'

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →