Madhya Pradesh High Court Aids Interfaith Couple, Says There's No Bar On Muslim Boy Marrying Hindu Girl U/S 4 Of Special Marriage Act

Coming to the aid of an interfaith couple, the Jabalpur Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court directed the state to facilitate the marriage of a Hindu girl and a Muslim boy before the marriage officer. 

In doing so, the court said that there is no prohibition to inter-faith marriage under Section 4 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954.

A division bench of Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Vivek Jain observed, “…there is a prohibition in the personal law that under the Mohammedan Law, a mohamendan boy cannot perform marriage with a Hindu girl. However, there is no bar, if the marriage is taken place under Section 4 of the Act of 1954.”

“…we interacted with petitioners/respondent Nos. 1 and 2 who are present on the direction of this Court and submit that from the last 5 years they are friends and are in live-in relation and they wish to perform marriage…Since we have declared that there is no prohibition under Section 4 of the Act of 1954 to marry in between the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, therefore, we dispose of this appeal directing the respondents/State authorities to facilitate them to appear before the Marriage Officer," the court added. 

As per the factual matrix of the case, the respondent Nos. 1 (Hindu girl) and 2 (Muslim boy) had applied for marriage before the Registrar, Marriage under Section 4 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 (Conditions relating to solemnization of special marriages). They were apprehending threat to their personal life and hence, had also preferred a Writ Petition for protection from the appellant/father of the girl and his family/community members. The present appeal was filed on the ground that the learned Single Judge has not given detailed consideration to the conditions prescribed under Section 4 of the Act of 1954.

The counsel for the appellant submitted that neither the petitioners/respondents no. 1 & 2 were given time to engage another counsel nor the appellant was given time to file his response in writing, though the petitioners/respondent No.1 and 2 had interim order in their favour. However, the learned Single Judge merely on the basis of statement recorded in his chamber and the averments made in the petition has decided the petition by taking recourse to Section 4 of the Special Marriage Act 1954. It was further argued that the Learned Single Judge had wrongly held that marriage can be solemnized under Special Marriage Act 1954 despite the personal laws of the persons.

Earlier, the Single Judge had observed and held that as per Mohammedan Law, the marriage of a Muslim boy with a girl who is an idolatress or a fire-worshipper, is not a valid marriage. Even if the marriage is registered under the Special Marriage Act, the marriage would not be termed as a valid marriage but an irregular (fasid) marriage. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed. Thereafter, another petition being was filed, which was also disposed of.

The Single Judge in the said petition had discussed the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, 1954. He referred to a judgement wherein it was held that provisions of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 will override other enactments and personal law. Further, marriage between two persons of different religions which do not fall under prohibitive categories mentioned in Section 4 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, can be solemnized under that Act despite personal laws of the persons. It was further observed that the said fact was not considered by the Co-ordinate Bench (first learned Single Judge) and there was no issue before the said Bench whether a Mohammedan boy and a Hindu girl can perform marriage under the Special Marriage Act. In those circumstances, it was held that in view of the above, the order passed by the coordinate Bench is not binding on him.

The High Court after considering the arguments and the orders passed by the lower court, observed that there is no prohibition to such marriage under Section 4 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954.

The court further took into consideration the fact that the respondent no. 1 and 2 have been friends for 5 years and were in a live-in relationship, therefore wished to perform marriage. 

The court also directed the concerned authorities to take action against anyone who creates any hindrance in performance of the said marriage.

“Since the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have availed the police protection from 22.10.2024, the said protection shall continue at least for one month after the marriage and thereafter the concerned Superintendent of Police shall assess the situation and if required as per threat perception, the protection shall continue till threat perception continues.”, the Court said.

Case Title: X Versus Y & Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (MP) 332

Click Here To Read/Download Order