A reciprocal marriage arrangement that ties two families together can make one woman’s decision to leave an abusive relationship affect another woman’s life. A survivor-turned-advocate and a recent High Court intervention have brought renewed attention to the practice.
A woman seeking to leave an unhappy or abusive marriage should not have to worry about what might happen to another woman because of her decision. Yet, in parts of Rajasthan, a reciprocal marriage arrangement known as atta-satta can create precisely this kind of pressure, linking the marital lives of two women from different families.
Under the practice, two families arrange marriages between their children, often with a daughter from one family marrying a son from another, while a daughter from the second family is married into the first. The arrangements are negotiated together, creating a relationship in which the fate of one marriage can become tied to the other.
Although families may view the arrangement as a way of securing marriage alliances and reducing financial burdens, the consequences can be particularly serious for women when consent is absent, a marriage involves a minor, or a woman faces pressure to remain in an abusive household.
The issue has received fresh attention following observations by the Rajasthan High Court in a matrimonial dispute this year. The court criticised the practice, particularly where minors are involved, and highlighted how reciprocal marriage arrangements can turn women and girls into bargaining instruments between families.
The experiences of women seeking to escape such arrangements also reveal how social pressure, financial dependence and the fear of consequences for other family members can make it difficult to leave.
A marriage arrangement in which two women’s lives become connected
Atta-satta, broadly translated as ‘give and take’, is practised in some communities in Rajasthan. In a typical arrangement, a family gives a daughter in marriage to another family and, in return, receives a bride for its son from that family.
The two marriages may be treated as part of a single family agreement rather than as independent relationships between consenting adults.
This creates an unequal situation when a woman wants to leave her marriage. Her decision may trigger pressure on the other woman in the reciprocal arrangement, who could face hostility, threats or demands to return to her marital home.
The result is a form of collective pressure in which a woman’s ability to make decisions about her own marriage may be restricted by an agreement negotiated by families.
The practice has been reported in parts of western Rajasthan, including Barmer, Bikaner and Jodhpur. However, its presence in particular communities should not be taken to mean that all marriages in these regions follow this arrangement.
Rajasthan High Court questions the practice
In April 2026, the Rajasthan High Court delivered a significant judgment in a matrimonial dispute involving a woman from Bikaner. While granting her divorce, the court also made strong observations about the atta-satta custom.
The judgment came in the case of Kiran Bishnoi versus Sunil Kumar. The woman had challenged a family court decision that had dismissed her divorce petition.
The High Court criticised the practice of exchanging daughters between families, particularly when the arrangement involves minors. It observed that such arrangements could suppress individual consent, reinforce patriarchal control and treat girls as bargaining instruments.
The court described the practice as a form of ‘mutual hostage-taking’ between families.
Its observations are important because they bring the question of consent and women’s autonomy into the discussion of a practice sometimes defended as a traditional marriage arrangement.
A custom, however, cannot override statutory protections or make an unlawful marriage valid. In particular, the law does not permit families to use tradition as justification for child marriage or coercion.
The judgment has therefore added an important legal dimension to the debate: marriage arrangements must respect the rights and consent of the individuals involved.
From a girl denied education to a woman helping others
The story of Monica Jod, a 35-year-old woman from Rajasthan, offers another perspective on the struggle for women’s independence.
At 14, Monica faced pressure to give up her education and marry. She grew up in an environment where the belief that sons were the future of the family shaped expectations about the lives of girls. Her wish to continue studying was not initially supported, including by women around her.
She approached Jodhpur-based Sambhali Trust for support after being denied the opportunity to study.
Her journey was not easy. She left home four times while trying to secure the freedom to make decisions about her own future.
Monica eventually continued her education and received the Rajasthan government’s Gargi Puraskar for academic achievement in Classes 10 and 12.
Her educational achievement also became a turning point in her relationship with her mother. Following the recognition, her mother encouraged her to make her own decisions rather than forcing her into marriage.
Today, Monica works with Sambhali Trust, supporting women who face discrimination, violence and restrictions on their choices. Her work includes helping women caught in the consequences of reciprocal marriage arrangements.
Her journey illustrates how access to education and sustained support can challenge expectations that girls should prioritise marriage over their own aspirations.
188 cases and 956 helpline calls: What the support figures reveal
Sambhali Trust, which works with women and girls facing violence and discrimination, has been supporting women affected by atta-satta arrangements.
The organisation has reported taking up 188 cases involving such marriages over the course of its work spanning 19 years.
Its more recent figures also indicate the scale of support being sought by women.
Between April 2025 and March 2026, the organisation reported:
- 956 helpline calls received.
- 188 cases provided with psychological counselling and legal guidance.
- 14 high-risk survivors provided temporary shelter.
These figures relate to the organisation’s reported support work and should not be interpreted as a statewide estimate of the number of atta-satta marriages or survivors in Rajasthan.
The trust’s Nirbhaya Initiative, launched in 2014, provides assistance that can include emergency support, counselling, medical help, legal guidance and temporary shelter for women facing serious risks.
Such services are particularly important for women who cannot immediately return to their parental homes or who fear that leaving a marriage could expose them or another woman to retaliation.
Why leaving an abusive marriage is not always straightforward
For a woman facing violence or coercion, deciding to leave is only one part of the struggle. Finding a safe place to stay, securing an income, arranging childcare and navigating legal proceedings can be equally difficult.
In an atta-satta arrangement, these challenges may be compounded by pressure from both families.
A woman may be told that leaving her husband will jeopardise the marriage of another woman in the family. This can make her feel responsible for consequences that should never have been placed on her.
Financial dependence is another major barrier. Women who have had limited access to education, employment or control over household finances may find it difficult to begin an independent life.
The availability of counselling, shelter, legal assistance and livelihood opportunities can therefore make a critical difference.
What legal protections can women seek?
Women facing domestic violence, forced marriage or threats have legal avenues available to them. The relevant course of action depends on their individual circumstances.
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, provides protection against physical, sexual, verbal, emotional and economic abuse. It also provides for remedies such as protection orders, residence orders, monetary relief and custody-related orders.
The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, provides legal protections against child marriage. In general, it defines a child as a male below 21 years and a female below 18 years. It also provides for the annulment of certain child marriages and punishment for those who facilitate or promote them.
Women who cannot afford legal representation can approach the District Legal Services Authority for assistance under the legal services framework.
In situations involving immediate threats or violence, women can seek help from the police and emergency services. The national emergency response number is 112, while the Women Helpline can be reached at 181, subject to local availability.
Access to these protections, however, depends on awareness, timely intervention and the availability of support systems that women can approach without fear.
Beyond condemning a custom: Making independence possible
The challenge posed by atta-satta cannot be addressed through legal criticism alone. Women need the practical ability to exercise their rights.
Education is one of the most important starting points. When girls are allowed to complete their schooling and pursue further studies, they have more opportunities to make independent decisions about their futures.
Access to vocational training, employment and control over personal savings is equally important. Financial independence cannot guarantee freedom from violence, but it can reduce the economic barriers that prevent women from seeking help.
Monica’s advice to women reflects this understanding. She encourages them to acquire skills, earn even small amounts and save a portion of their income.
Her own journey, from a teenager fighting for the right to study to an adult supporting other women, highlights the importance of having people and institutions that stand beside girls when their families do not support their choices.
Ultimately, the question raised by atta-satta is not whether families can negotiate marriage alliances. It is whether the individuals being married have the freedom to consent, refuse or leave without being made responsible for another person’s marriage.
A woman’s future cannot be treated as an exchange between households. Nor should her freedom depend on whether another family is willing to release its own daughter.
For women caught in such arrangements, independence begins when the right to make decisions about their own lives is recognised not as a privilege, but as a fundamental condition of dignity.
