A dear friend who fearlessly took to the stage, exposing her vulnerability as a Muslim and unwavering resolve to fight against the looming threat of fascism. Through her powerful play, Her courageous act is archiving her and her community’s vulnerability; in the theatre, I argue that love makes hope divisible and also additive.

A friend, a mathematician, for whom parenting is transformative in times of hate. Observing his interactions with his son, I witness the poignant beauty that arises when love takes root and blossoms. In these moments, love transcends mere sentimentality and becomes a tangible force intricately woven into the fabric of their relationship. His parenting is his rebellion, a gentle nudge to brush the hate aside.

Two friends, a Hanuman Bhakt, is married to the daughter of a Communist party worker. At home, love and logic take turns to make decisions about travel, food and politics; the dynamic between passion and reason weaves a rebellious tapestry within their home. It challenges societal norms and expectations, embracing a unique blend of spirituality and ideology. Their interactions are marked by a delicate balance of emotional connection and rational thinking, enabling them to navigate various aspects of life together. Their daughter becomes the embodiment of their hopes for a brighter future. Through their loving and logical upbringing, she grows up with a compassionate spirit and a strong sense of justice. Their household becomes a beacon of hope, demonstrating that embracing the heart and mind can challenge the status quo and inspire positive change. Not surprisingly, their daughter is called Meera.

A friend and her partner also take enormous pleasure in parenting. They are like a “zariwala“.A master zariwala is full of dexterity, skillfully working with stitches, boundaries, needles, and saree borders. The zariwala‘s nimble fingers dance across the surface, creating a harmonious blend of craftsmanship and artistry. This inter-religious couple stitch stories of hope and love into their parenting, like the detailing they give to the immaculate curation of their house. Their children embody a love that comes with rebellion.

Their world reminds me of a story by Basheer. The story is set in 1940s Kerala and revolves around Keshavan Nair, a Hindu bank employee, and Saramma, a Christian woman who lives in a house owned by Saramma’s father. Keshavan Nair and Saramma, fall in love.

Keshavan Nair and Saramma playfully decide on a name for their child by placing selected objects in a container, mixing them up, and drawing two chits without looking. The chits read “Sky” and “Toffee.” They combine the two names and ultimately decide to name their child “Skytoffee,” feeling excited about their choice. “Skytoffee” embodies a sense of wonder and delight. It symbolises the boundless expanse of the sky and the sweetness of life.

V and S had the task of naming the child; the name of the child has the burden to carry an entire “culture”; it is aspirational, it is identity, cultural, and it could reflect country, religion, social status and family values; yet when V and S decided that they would call their children Abeer and Meer, contrary to the family idea, there is a rebellion, the rebellion is born amid love, and love is not divisible here but expansive, Meer calls V Ammi. I do not know for sure if they will become Poets of Words, but I know they will be poets of thoughts; the rhythm of poetry cannot escape when you are born amid love and rebellion.

bavrese is jahan mein bawra ek saath ho

is saayani bheed mein bass haathon mein tera haath ho

bavrisi dhun ho koi bavra ek raag ho

bavrisi dhun ho koi bavra ek raag ho

bavrese pair chahe bawre tarano ke bavarese bol pe thirkana

bavra mann dekhne chala ek sapna

Parenting in the midst of hate is the biggest rebellion.

Bavra mann dekhne chala ek sapna (My wandering mind sets out to behold a dream,)

Poets like Kabir, Akka Mahadevi, and Basava defied conventions through their verses, advocating unity, equality, and spiritual awakening. Kabir’s poems transcend caste and religion, Akka Mahadevi’s songs emphasise inner love, and Basava’s verses call for social justice.

My colleague K has decided to marry M; she is breaking the caste barrier, like Akka Mahadevi and Basava; love is rebellion, and K and M’s rebels are who are building a paradise.

इंक़लाब, इश्क़ है,

इश्क़ इबादत है,

इबादत ही जन्नत है।

Revolution is love, Love is worship, Worship is paradise.

(Venkat Srinivasan is a financial professional with a master’s degree in economics. I am intensely interested in the arts, academia, and social issues related to development and human rights)

Related:

Lord Ram, in my sixth letter I appeal to your diverse forms

First Letter to Lord Ram: To Lord Ram, a letter of remorse and resolve

Second Letter to Lord Ram: To Lord Ram, I write again for hope

Third Letter to Lord Ram, we must talk spirituality and politics

Fourth Letter to Lord Ram, Anantatma & Anantaroopa, the Infinite Soul & who has infinite forms

Fifth Letter to Lord Ram,  Perfect Lord and Imperfect Bhakthi

The post इंक़लाब, इश्क़ है, Love is rebellion appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has barred the state government from using coercion against anyone who disobeys section 10 of the MP Freedom of Religion Act, which requires anyone who wishes to convert to another religion to notify the district administration in advance. The petitioners had asked the court to invalidate the MP Freedom of Religion Act 2021 as being unconstitutional.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court then issued this significant ruling, prohibiting the State Government from using coercion against anyone who violates Section 10 of the Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2021, which calls for anyone wishing to change their religion to make a declaration to the District Magistrate.

A bench of Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Prakash Chandra Gupta further ordered the state not to prosecute the adult citizens if they solemnize the marriage of their own free will after finding section 10 to be prima facie unconstitutional.

Section of the MP Freedom of Religion Act, 2021 reads as follows:

On Tuesday, the division bench had reserved decision on a number of petitions seeking to keep interfaith weddings beyond of the Act’s reach and challenging the constitutionality of the 2021 Act.

In one of the pleas, a specific prayer was made to strike down Sections 2(a), 2(b), 2(c), 2(d), 2(e), 2(i), 3 (Prohibition of conversion from one religion to another), 4 (Complaint against the conversion of religion), 5 (Punishment for contravention of Section 3), 6 (any marriage performed in contravention of Section 3 shall be deemed null and void.), 10 (Declaration before conversion of religion) and 12 (Burden of Proof) of the Act.

Contentions of the Petitioner:

The 2021 Act, according to the petitioners, is unconstitutional and breaches the fundamental rights guaranteed by Articles 14, 19, and 25 of the constitution. An adult has the right to marry whoever they choose, as contended by the petitioners. However, if a marriage is performed under duress or covertly, the Act stipulates that the offender could face 3 to 10 years in prison.

The petitioners’ main argument was that the 2021 act is blatantly illegal and that, as a result, the respondent/State should be prohibited from prosecuting anyone in accordance with the contested M.P. Freedom of Religion Act, 2021, while these proceedings are ongoing. It was further contended that the legislation grants the government unrestricted and arbitrary powers to prosecute persons and that it also aims to interfere with citizens’ fundamental rights to practice their faith and marry a partner of their choice, regardless of caste or religion.

Additionally, it was argued that if the contested statute is allowed to stand, it will not only violate crucial fundamental rights but also disrupt social cohesion, highlighting the importance of every citizen’s freedom to remain silent. The petitioners argued before the court with vigor that a citizen is not required to reveal either his current faith or his plans to convert to a new one.

The final argument stated was that Section 10 of the Act’s requirement that people disclose their faith or their desire to change it may actually cause conflict in the community and jeopardize the convert’s life or limb. As a result, it was made clear that the Act of 2021’s necessity for prior information before conversion is a violation of a citizen’s fundamental rights.

Contentions of the state:

The State contended that if interim relief is given, it will essentially amount to providing the petitioners with ultimate remedy because they are requesting a broad interim relief that cannot be granted. There was also a claim that the Court should uphold the constitutionality of the enactment.

Order and Rationale of the Court:

In order to emphasize that marriage, sexual orientation, and choice in connection to these characteristics fall under the purview of the right to privacy and have a direct bearing on the dignity of the individual, the Court first considered the rulings of the Apex Court, namely Lata Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. [(2006) 5 SCC 475] and LaxmibaiChandaragi B &Anr. v. State of Karnataka &Ors [LL 2021 SC 79].

The Himachal Pradesh High Court’s judgment in Evangelical Fellowship of India and Anr. Vs. State of H.P. [(2012) SCC Online HP 5554], which ruled that a provision of the 2006 H.P. Freedom of Religion Act requiring citizens to inform the government of their desire to change their religion was unconstitutional, was also taken into consideration by the court.

In light of the aforementioned rulings, it’s significant to note that the MP High Court also acknowledged that the freedom to choose a religion and the freedom to publicly express or refrain from publicly expressing those choices are both implicit in the Constitutional right to freedom of religion under Article 25. In regards to this, the Court determined that the petitioners had established a strong prima facie case for the granting of temporary protection in relation to the marriage of two adult citizens who are doing so of their own free will and against any coercive action for violating Section 10 of the Act.

Therefore, the Court ordered the State government to file its para-wise response within three weeks and directed the state to not punish the adult citizens if they solemnize the marriage of their own free will and not take coercive action for breach of Section 10.

The court directed to parties to finish filing their pleadings as soon as possible. After the pleading process is complete, the parties are free to submit the proper application in order to request an out-of-turn final hearing in this matter.

Gujarat High Court’s stay on the Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021

In August 2021, the Gujarat High Court Bench of Chief Justice VikramNath and Justice BirenVaishnavpassed an interim order rulingagainst the provisions of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021. It ordered that they said provisions will not apply to inter-faith marriages that take place without force, allurement or fraudulent means. The court had declared that the rigours of Section 3, 4, 4A to 4C, 5, 6, and 6A of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act shall not operate merely because the marriage is solemnised by a person of one religion with another, without force or by allurement or by fraudulent means and such marriages cannot be termed as marriages for the purposes of unlawful conversion.

Later in the same month, the Gujarat High Court refused to allow the state government’s plea seeking removal of stay on operation of section 5 of the Gujarat Freedom Of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021. According to Section 5 of the law, it was mandated that religious priests must take prior permission from the district magistrate for converting any person from one religion to another.

The order can be read here.

Background: Anti-conversion laws in India

The Constitution guarantees the freedom to profess, propagate, and practise religion, and allows all religious sections to manage their own affairs in matters of religion; subject to public order, morality, and health. To date, there have been no central legislations restricting or regulating religious conversions. In 2015, the Union Law Ministry stated that Parliament does not have the legislative competence to pass an anti-conversion legislation. However, it is to be noted that, since 1954, on multiple occasions, Private Member Bills have been introduced in (but never approved by) the Parliament, to regulate religious conversions.

Over the years, several states have enacted ‘Freedom of Religion’ legislation to restrict religious conversions carried out by force, fraud, or inducements.  These are: (i) Odisha (1967), (ii) Madhya Pradesh (1968), (iii) Arunachal Pradesh (1978), (iv) Chhattisgarh (2000 and 2006), (v) Gujarat (2003), (vi) Himachal Pradesh (2006 and 2019), (vii) Jharkhand (2017), and (viii) Uttarakhand (2018).

Additionally, the Himachal Pradesh (2019) and Uttarakhand legislations also declare a marriage to be void if it was done for the sole purpose of unlawful conversion, or vice-versa. Further, the states of Tamil Nadu (2002) and Rajasthan (2006 and 2008) had also passed similar legislation.  However, the Tamil Nadu legislation was repealed in 2006 (after protests by Christian minorities), while in case of Rajasthan, the bills did not receive the Governor’s and President’s assent respectively.

About the Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act, 2021

The Madhya Pradesh (MP) Govt promulgated the MP Freedom of Religion Ordinance that was passed through a Special Session of the State Assembly on December 27, 2020 and officially notified in the State Gazette on January 9, 2021. While the state has provided the objective behind bringing this act to restrain any kind of forceful and illegal religious conversions done by religious organizations or extremist groups, in reality, this Act is just a tool for the harassment of young vulnerable couples who are deprived of their right to marry any individual on their free will.

The MP Act has a unique definition of “conversion” which states that “Conversion” means renouncing one religion and adopting another; but the return of any person already converted to the fold of his parental religion shall not be deemed conversion. The MP Act has an additional sub-section that such conversions, carried out in contravention of this provision “will be deemed null and void”.

The MP Act also states that that any marriage performed in contravention of section 3, which prohibits unlawful conversion from one religion to another, will be deemed to be null and void.

Section 10 of the Act requires an individual to give a declaration 60 days in advance to the DM that conversion is being done without any force, coercion, undue influence or allurement. The religious priest/convertor is required to give a similar notice 60 days in advance.

The MP Act has modelled on the UP Act, Uttarakhand Act and the Himachal Pradesh Act that penalises conversion from one religion to another for marriage. The MP Act is seriously problematic per se, as it is more stringent than its precursor from another state. For instance, the HP and Uttarakhand laws do not specify the fine to be imposed in case of contravention but the subsequent UP and MP ordinances specify the minimum amount of fine to be collected. Even in that the MP ordinance imposes higher amount of fine for the same offence, compared to the UP ordinance. Even the period of imprisonment is longer for similar offence in the MP ordinance, which is the latest law to be passed in this bandwagon of anti-conversion laws.

CJP’s plea in Supreme Court against the Anti-Conversion Laws

In December 2020, a PIL was been filed by Citizens for Justice and Peace against the then Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unwlaful Conversion of Religion Law 2020 and the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018, ostensibly prohibiting forceful prohibition of conversion for the purposes of marriage.

The Petitioner-organization had contended in its petition that the provisions of the impugned Acts violate Article 21 of the Constitution as it empowers the State to suppress an individual’s personal liberty and impinge upon an individual’s right to freedom of choice and right to freedom of religion.

It further submitted that the “right to convert” oneself to another religion is manifested in Article 25 of the Constitution. However, the said Acts impinge upon this right by imposing unreasonable and discriminatory restrictions on it by mandating that the administration be informed of such intention and a probe be launched in such a personal and intimate exercise of one’s right.

Later, in February 2021, CJP then approached the Supreme Court seeking permission to challenge Love-jihad laws passed by Himachal Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh in its same plea which seeks to challenge the laws made by Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand against religious conversions for the sake of marriages. The Supreme Court had then allowed CJP to make Madhya Pradesh and Himachal Pradesh as respondent parties to the petition.

Related:

Guj gov’t seeks removal of stay on operation of sec 5 of anti-conversion law
Anti-conversion law will not apply to inter-faith marriages unless there is force, fraud, allurement: Gujarat HC
CJP moves SC against “Love Jihad” laws
CJP’s Love Jihad Petition: SC issues notice to UP and Uttarakhand
“Love Jihad” laws curb individual and collective freedoms

The post No coercive action against voluntary religious conversion: MP High Court appeared first on SabrangIndia.

An inter-faith couple has been found dead in an abandoned hut in Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh and local police claims that the couple killed themselves after consuming poison. The girl was forced to marry another man against her wishes about six months ago, and she went missing on the day of Holi. It now appears the couple in love, a Muslim boy and a Hindu girl, ended their lives since the girl was married off.

Reportedly, the couple’s bodies were found in an abandoned hut outside their village with a packet of rat poisons next to them. A police officer told Times of India that the post mortem report suggested possibility of poisoning and that their viscera samples will now be sent for lab examination.

SSP, Bareilly, Rohit Singh Sajwan told TOI, “Prima facie it appears that the couple has committed suicide because of their families were against their relationship and the girl was married elsewhere. No one from their families has come forward to register a police complaint. But we are also investigating the possibility of foul play. We have checked their conversations and it is clear that they were in contact even after (her) marriage”.

The villagers have claimed that the girl’s family had forced her to marry a man within their caste, after they got to know about her relationship with the Muslim boy.

Related:

Bill against ‘love jihad’ to be tabled in Gujarat Assembly
Love Jihad bogey derailed in Mangaluru
Nuns’ matter, no small matter: an open letter to Amit Shah

The post UP: Inter-faith couple found dead in Bareilly appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Shocked, at the response of the hotel, the woman who has been friends with the man for over a decade said, “We are living in the 21st century and I don’t know why people still have this notion of dividing people on the basis of religion.”   After being denied permission to check in, the man contacted the booking app which promptly refunded most of his money and even made alternative booking arrangements. However, the man claims these arrangements were not at par with the previous facilities. Meanwhile, Oyo has also initiated an inquiry into the matter and apologised for the incident. 

The post Jaipur hotel denies room to inter-faith couple appeared first on SabrangIndia.