"Undue Fervor Shown By Cops As This Was Inter-Religious Marriage": Gujarat High Court Sets Couple Free, Orders IG-level Inquiry

The Court was hearing a habeas corpus plea filed by the brother of the husband, Nisarkhan Jitubhai Ghasura, stating that the latter was illegally detained and remanded to police custody, following his recent marriage to his 29-year-old childhood friend from another community.

The Bench of Justice Sonia Gokani & Justice Sangeeta K. Vishen directed the Range IG concerned to inquire into the matter, more particularly, considering the conduct of Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 (cops), in whose custody, the couple has been detained for all these days, and report to the DIG.

While conducting such inquiry, the Range IG has been directed to bear in mind that this is the case, where, the undue fervor is shown, on account of this being an inter-religion marriage.

The Court also said that IG has to keep in mind the golden words of the Supreme Court in such matters, where, the issue had come-up, particularly, of honour killing in case of inter-caste/inter-religion marriage in case of Lata singh v. State of U.P. & Another, (2006) 5 SCC 475 and Shakti Vahini v. UOI & Others (2018) 7 SCC 192.

Importantly, the Court also ordered the immediate release of Shweta Girishchandra Raval (Wife), on her executing personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- before the Court concerned.

Further, Nisarkhan Jitubhai Ghasura (Husband) was also directed to be released on his executing personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one SURETY of the like amount before the Court concerned.

Earlier in the day on Tuesday (19th January), the Court had directed the State to produce both Shweta Nisharkhan Ghasura, who was in the police custody from 09.01.2021 and Nisharkhan Ghasura through video conferencing from the District Court, Palanpur at 04:00 p.m on Tuesday itself.

Lastly, the State also assured the Court that the Couple would be provided police protection and that the Commissioner of Police, Surat, would be directed to grant the couple protection, initially, for the period of 4 Weeks. Thereafter, he shall take a call and shall decide, as to whether the same requires to be continued or not.

The Court also directed,

"In wake of the fact that the couple is native of Palanpur, as and when they are required to go to Palanpur, at least, one week in advance, they shall make a request to the SP, Palanpur, for providing them police protection, who shall provide them the same."

It may be noted that in the celebrated Judgment of Shakti Vahini v. UOI & others, the Supreme Court of India in the year 2018 held that "when two adults marry out of their volition, they choose their path; they consummate their relationship; they feel that it is their goal and they have the right to do so."

"Any kind of torture or torment or ill-treatment in the name of honour that tantamount to atrophy of choice of an individual relating to love and marriage by any assembly, whatsoever nomenclature it assumes, is illegal and cannot be allowed a moment of existence", the Court further said.

Related matters

In related news, recently, the Allahabad High Court had reiterated that no one is entitled to disrupt the lives of two adults, who reside together willingly. Holding thus, the Court came to rescue of another inter-faith couple, facing harassment at the hands of their families.

A Single Bench of Justice Saral Srivastava observed,

"The Court has repeatedly held that where the two individuals having attained the age of majority, are living together, nobody is entitled to interfere in their peaceful life."

Also Read - Upholding Love : In Last One Month, Allahabad High Court Grants Protection To Over 125 Inter-Faith/Caste Couples

Also Read: "Right To Choose A Partner Of Choice A Fundamental Right": Allahabad High Court Says The Judgments Which Held "Conversion For The Purpose Of Marriage Only" Not Good Law

Also, last month, the Allahabad High Court had reunited an interfaith couple while noting that the Woman (Shikha) had "expressed that she wants to live with her husband (Salman @ Karan) she is free to move as per her own choice without any restriction or hindrance being created by third party."

The Bench of Justice Pankaj Naqvi and Justice Vivek Agarwal was hearing a habeas corpus plea filed by the man (Salman @ Karan), who submitted before the Court that his wife (Shikha) had been sent to her parents by the Child Welfare Committee (CWC), against her wishes.

Last month, the Delhi High Court on Wednesday (16^th December) came to the rescue of an Interfaith Couple from Uttar Pradesh, who had moved the court (seeking protection) fearing threats, intimidation and acute harassment at the hands of vigilante groups, vested interests and even the authorities, seeking protection.

Further, the Calcutta High on Monday (21^st December) made it clear that if an adult marries as per her choice and decides to convert and not return to her paternal house, there could be no interference in the matter.

In November 2020, the Karnataka High Court held that the right of any major individual to marry the person of his/her choice is a fundamental right enshrined in the Constitution of India.

A division bench of Justices S Sujata and Sachin Shankar Magadum, while disposing of a habeas corpus petition filed by one Wajeed Khan seeking the release of his lover Ramya from confinement, said:

"It is well settled that a right of any major individual to marry the person of his/her choice is a fundamental right enshrined in the Constitution of India and the said liberty relating to the personal relationships of two individuals cannot be encroached by anybody irrespective of caste or religion."

Case title - Ghasura Riyazkhan Jitubhai v. State Of Gujarat [Special Criminal Application No. 773 of 2021]

Click Here To Download Order/Judgment

Read Order/Judgment