Interfaith Marriage Registration Can't Be Refused By Insisting On Conversion Approval: Allahabad HC Affirms Right To Choose Partners

This assertion came from the bench of Justice Suneet Kumar who was hearing a batch of petitions (17 in number), pertaining to an interfaith marriage contracted by the petitioners.

The common thread running through all the petitions is that the petitioners have contracted interfaith marriage upon conversion; petitioners are major and pleaded that the conversion is of free will.

Some petitioners are highly qualified i.e., professionals, graduates, and some appear to have not passed secondary examinations and apprehending their threat to their life and liberty at the hands of their parents, relatives, and other family members in connivance of the State machinery, they moved to the High Court.

Submissions put forth

The State argued that petitioners are not entitled to any relief from this Court and they should approach the competent district authority and obtain approval, in the first instance, with regard to their conversion.

The petitioners argued that the prior approval of the district authority followed by registration of marriage is not sine qua non before conversion and marriage and even taking a case that approval of the authority was not taken prior to conversion, the petitioners still have a right to live together being major.

They also argued that the citizens have a right to make a choice of their partner and faith and interference by the State or by the private respondents would be tantamount to encroaching upon their constitutional right to freedom, choice, life, liberty, and to live life on own terms as man and woman.

Importantly, it was submitted before the Court by most of the parties that they have applied for registration of their marriage, no further permission with regard to conversion is required from the district administration.

Court's observations

At the outset, the Court observed that the Constitution of India guarantees every person the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion which includes freedom from religion, freedom to change religion and belief.

"The freedom of conscience means that a person is free to entertain any belief or doctrine regarded by him/her as conducive to his/her spiritual well-being," the Court added.

Further, referring to the Special Marriage Act, the Court observed that in the present circumstances, where society has progressed considerably, in the backdrop of expanding secular space and mobility of the citizen, the Special Marriage Act, mandating notice, declaration of all particulars, and inviting objections thereupon, subjecting it to public scrutiny is violative of the fundamental right of liberty and privacy granted to the petitioners under the Constitution.

Regarding the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, the Allahabad High Court observed that Interfaith marriage, per se, is not prohibited under the Act of 2021, but the parties undergoing interfaith marriage can be subjected to harassment.

"The Unlawful Conversion Act, 2021, per se, does not prohibit interfaith marriage. The Marriage Registrar/Officer, however, lacks the power to withhold the registration of marriage, merely for the reason that the parties have not obtained the necessary approval of conversion from the district authority. Such approval is a directory and not mandatory. If interpreted otherwise the Act would not satisfy the test of reasonableness and fairness, and would fail to pass the muster of Article 14 and Article 21," the  

The Court further noted that if there is an objection from an aggrieved person i.e. parents, brother, and sister of any one party to the marriage, that would not ipso facto nullify the marriage if it is lawful and the parties are adult.

Stressing that a declaration would have to be sought from the competent court, the Court, importantly, observed thus:

"Marriage Registrar/Officer cannot refuse registration of the marriage merely on an allegation or a complaint by an aggrieved person… The validity of the marriage is void or voidable cannot be gone into by the Marriage Registrar/Officer. The authority, be it the Marriage Registrar/Officer, or the district authority under the unlawful Conversion Act, 2021, is neither a court nor authorized by law to enter into the issue pertaining to the validity of marriage or prohibit inter faith marriage."

Further, the Court opined that in our legal system, particularly secular laws, governing marriage and registration, as it exists on a date, compels and coerces a party to an interfaith marriage to compulsorily convert.

"The conversion of faith may appear voluntary, but, at the same time it could in all probability be a case of going against one's conscience, thus, unwillingly violating the freedom of conscience guaranteed to the individual under Article 25 of the Constitution," noted the Court.

Against this backdrop, the Court stressed that the stage has reached that the Parliament should intervene and examine, as to whether the country requires a multiplicity of marriage and registration laws or the parties to a marriage should be brought under the umbrella of a single Family Code.

Therefore, the Government of India was asked by the Court to consider the constitution of a Committee/Commission for implementing the mandate of Article 44, as directed by the Supreme Court.

"The factum of marriage and the registration of marriage are entirely distinct and different. The registration merely evidences the factum of marriage between the parties, whereas, legality of the marriage, whether void or voidable, is for the aggrieved party to settle in accordance with the law before the designated forum/court," the Court held.

Lastly, the writ petitions were allowed by the Court by passing the following orders:

• The State respondents and the private respondents are restrained from interfering with the life, liberty, and privacy of the petitioners to live as man and woman;
• The police authorities of the respective districts shall ensure the safety of the petitioners and provide protection to them, if demanded or needed;
• The Marriage Registrar/Officer of respective districts are directed to forthwith register the marriage of the petitioners, without, insisting/awaiting approval of the competent district authority with regard to the conversion of faith;
• It will be open to the aggrieved party, in the event of fraud and misrepresentation, to take recourse of law, both – criminal and civil, including, annulment of marriage before the competent forum;
• The State Government to issue appropriate Government Order to the Marriage Registrar/Officer, District Authority, to comply and implement this order.