News Analysis India

Tag: interfaith marriage

  • Allahabad HC grants protection against harassment to interfaith couple

    Express News Service

    LUCKNOW: Granting protection against harassment to an interfaith couple from Gorakhpur, the Allahabad High Court on Thursday observed that adults had the right to choose their life partners irrespective of the religions professed by them.

    The court made it clear that even their parents could not object to their relationship.

    The court was hearing the petition filed jointly by one Shifa Hasan and her Hindu husband. The division bench, comprising Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Deepak Verma, observed that it was beyond dispute that two adults had the right of choice of their matrimonial partner irrespective of the faith they believed in and the religion they professed.

    “As the present petition is a joint petition by the two individuals who claim to be in love with each other and are major, therefore, in our considered opinion, nobody, not even their parents, could object to their relationship”, the court added in the judgment.

    In the joint petition, the petitioners’ had contended that they were in love with each other and were living together of their own will. However, their relationship was not being accepted by some of their family members and they were disturbing their peaceful living.

    ALSO READ | Maharashtra: Interfaith marriage ceremony held after being called off amid threats

    Moreover, after hearing all sides at length, the court granted protection to the couple, saying that not even their parents had the right to object to their relationship.

    The court also directed the Gorakhpur police authorities to ensure that the petitioners were not subjected to any harassment by the father of the girl or by any other person in connection with their relationship with each other.

    During the course of the hearing, the petitioner – Hasan submitted before the court that she had also filed an application for conversion from Muslim to Hindu religion. As per her statement in the court, the district magistrate (DM) of Gorakhpur had called for a report from the police station concerned on the said application. As per the report submitted by the police authorities concerned, while the boy’s father was not agreeable to the marriage, his mother was ready for the same.

    However, petitioner Shifa Hasan’s parents were opposed to the marriage. Consequently, in view of the same, the couple approached the High Court claiming a threat to their life.

    The Court took note of the fact that both the petitioners were major, aged 19 and 24 years, respectively. Hence, the court proceeded to grant them protection, while clarifying that the order was not any final opinion regarding the age of the petitioners as the findings were only prima facie in nature for the purposes of deciding the issue regarding protection of the life of the petitioners.

  • Gujarat to move Supreme Court against HC stay on conversion law sections: Deputy CM Nitin Patel

    By PTI

    AHMEDABAD: Gujarat Deputy Chief Minister Nitin Patel on Friday said the state government will move the Supreme Court against the High Court’s last week order staying certain sections of the contentious law against religious conversion, including its “core” provision.

    Among other sections, which mainly deal with religious conversion through marriage, the Gujarat High Court had also stayed the operation of section 5, which according to the BJP government, is the “core” of the entire Act and a stay on it effectively stays the entire legislation.

    Some provisions of the Gujarat Freedom Of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021, have been challenged in the HC.

    “The Gujarat government brought this law, popularly known as anti-love jihad law, to save daughters from anti-social elements who try to trap these girls by lying about their income, lifestyle and religion. Girls learn only after marriage that the man belongs to another religion and earns nothing,” Patel told reporters here.

    “Since some people have challenged the provisions of the new law, the High Court has recently put a stay on the law. However, after consulting legal experts and our Advocate General, Chief Minister Vijay Rupani has decided to challenge this stay in the Supreme Court,” Patel added.

    The 2021 law, which penalises forcible or fraudulent religious conversion through marriage, was notified by the BJP government on June 15 this year.

    The original Act was in force since 2003 and its amended version was passed in the Assembly in April.

    Last month, the Gujarat chapter of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind filed a petition in the HC, claiming that some of the amended sections of the new law were unconstitutional.

    On August 19, the high court stayed sections 3, 4, 4A to 4C, 5, 6 and 6A of the amended Act pending further hearing, saying if an interfaith marriage is done without any force, allurement or fraudulent means, such marriages cannot be termed as “marriages for the purposes of unlawful conversion” as defined in these sections.

    While other sections deal with conversion through marriage, section 5 of the Act mandates that religious priests must take prior permission from the district magistrate for converting a person from one faith to another.

    Moreover, the one who got converted also needs to “send an intimation” to the district magistrate in a prescribed form.

    Non-adherence to these rules would attract upto one year of jail term.

    On Wednesday, Advocate General Kamal Trivedi had moved the HC to remove section 5 from the stay order.

    During a hearing on Thursday, Trivedi, on behalf of the state government, told a division bench that section 5 of the Act was there ever since the original law was enacted in 2003 and it has nothing to do with marriage per se.

    He tried to convince the judges that a stay on section 5 would actually stay the application of the entire law itself, and no one would approach the authorities for seeking permission before getting converted.

    However, the division bench of Chief Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Biren Vaishnav had turned down the state government’s plea seeking modification of its August 19 order.

  • Gujarat govt moves HC seeking removal of stay on section 5 of anti-conversion law

    By PTI

    AHMEDABAD: The Gujarat government on Wednesday approached the state high court seeking rectification in its recent order in which it stayed the operation of section 5 of the new anti-conversion law.

    The government told the Gujarat High Court that section 5 of the Gujarat Freedom Of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021 has nothing to do with marriage per se.

    The court agreed to hear the government’s contention.

    On August 19, the high court had stayed sections 3, 4, 4A to 4C, 5, 6 and 6A of the 2021 amended Act pending further hearing, saying that they “shall not operate merely because a marriage is solemnised by a person of one religion with a person of another religion without force or by allurement or by fraudulent means and such marriages cannot be termed as marriages for the purposes of unlawful conversion.”

    The state government approached the division bench of Chief Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Biren Vaishnav on Wednesday, seeking its permission for circulation of the note for rectification of its order regarding section 5 of the amended Act, which has been challenged through two petitions.

    Advocate General Kamal Trivedi told the court that section 5 has nothing to do with marriage and it is permission for conversion, which people have been seeking for the last 18 years under the Gujarat Freedom Of Religion Act, 2003.

    “My Lords have recorded my argument, I said that per se marriage cannot be prohibited. Section 5 has nothing to do with it. It talks about whoever wants to convert have to take permission, and people have been taking permission since 2003,” he said.

    He said that section 5 does not use the word “marriage” and it deals with permission from the District Magistrate for conversion, either before or after marriage or even in cases without marriage.

    “Virtually, section 5 has to stay today, even when conversion is voluntary. If I want to marry a Muslim boy, people are coming forward and taking permission for conversion, before or after marriage, and even without marriage,” he argued.

    The court granted permission to hear the case saying that the lawyers for the petitioners should be informed about it.

    The petitioners had sought interim relief in as much as the amended section 3 of the 2003 Act prohibits marriage on a presumption that such a marriage is for the purposes of conversion.

    The concept of marriage has no bearing on conversion, Trivedi had argued.

    He had also argued that marriage per se is not prohibited, but a conversion actuated by fraud or allurement or a forcible marriage.

    He had said that the focal point is conversion by force or a fraudulent marriage or marriage by allurement.

    He said the purpose of the Act is to prohibit unlawful conversion.

    Section 5 of the law mandates that religious priests must take prior permission from the district magistrate for converting any person from one religion to another.

    Moreover, the one who got converted also needs to “send an intimation” to the DM in a prescribed form.

    The Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021, which penalises forcible or fraudulent religious conversion through marriage, was notified by the state government on June 15.

    Similar laws have also been enacted by the BJP governments in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh.

    Last month, the Gujarat chapter of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind filed a petition, claiming that some of the amended sections of the state’s new law were unconstitutional.

  • SC allows Himachal, Madhya Pradesh to be made parties to plea against laws on conversion due to interfaith marriage

    By PTI
    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Wednesday permitted an NGO to make Himachal Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh as parties to a pending petition challenging the controversial state laws regulating conversions due to inter-faith marriages.

    A bench headed by Chief Justice S A Bobde also allowed Muslim body Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind to become a party to the petition on the ground that a large number of Muslims are being harassed under these laws across the country.

    The apex court on January 6 had agreed to examine controversial new laws of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand regulating religious conversions due to interfaith marriages.

    The bench, also comprising Justices A S Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian, however refused to stay the controversial provisions of the laws and issued notices to both the state governments on two different petitions.

    The pleas, filed by advocate Vishal Thakre and others and an NGO ‘Citizen for Justice and Peace’, have challenged the Constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Ordinance, 2020 and the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018 which regulate religious conversions of interfaith marriages.

  • 30-day notice under UP Special Marriage Act optional, says HC

    Express News Service
    NEW DELHI:  In a big relief to inter-faith couples, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court on Wednesday ruled that the publication of notice of intended marriages under the Special Marriage Act can’t be mandatory as it violates the right to privacy. 

    The court said publication of such a notice and inviting objections to it, “would be an infringement of the fundamental rights of liberty and privacy”. It is up to the couple to decide whether to publish the notice or not, said Justice Vivek Chaudhary. The single-judge bench passed the order while hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by a Muslim woman who had converted to Hinduism to marry a Hindu man.

    The petitioner said her father was not letting her live with her husband. The bench also observed that the publication of notice 30 days ahead of the intended marriage will affect the couple’s freedom to solemnise the marriage “without interference from state and non-state actors.” If the couple did not make a written request for publication of notice, the Marriage Officer “shall not publish any such notice or entertain objections to the intended marriage and proceed with the solemnization of the marriage”, said the 47-page judgment. 

  • SC agrees to examine validity of state laws on religious conversions due to interfaith marriage

    By PTI
    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Wednesday agreed to examine controversial new laws of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand regulating religious conversions due to inter-faith marriages.

    A bench headed by Chief Justice SA Bobde refused, however, to stay the controversial provisions of the laws and issued notices to both state governments on two different petitions.

    The pleas, filed by advocate Vishal Thakre and others and an NGO ‘Citizen for Justice and Peace’, have challenged the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Ordinance, 2020 and the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018 which regulate religious conversions of inter-faith marriages.

    At the outset, the top court asked the petitioners to approach the Allahabad High Court after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that it is already seized of the matter.

    ​ALSO READ | Interfaith marriage: Uttarakhand HC asks Haridwar admin for protection to couple

    The bench said that this is not the transfer petition where it can transfer to itself all the cases on the law after one of the petitioner said that the issue should be examined by the top court.

    Senior advocate C U Singh, appearing for the NGO, referred to the judgement of Justice (retd) Deepak Gupta and says that similar laws are being made in various states.

    He sought stay of the provisions of the law and said that people are being in the middle of wedding ceremonies.

    Singh added that some of the provisions of these laws are oppressive and horrible in nature and requires prior consent of government to marry which is absolutely obnoxious.

    The bench said that it is issuing notice and sought response from both the state governments within four weeks.

    When Singh insisted for stay of provisions, the CJI said that now stay is sought on some provisions without hearing the states.

    “How can it be done?” the bench said.