Acting Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Arif Doctor, sitting as a division bench, sent a notice to the State, directing it to respond to the plea within two weeks, and set the matter for hearing three weeks later.

It is essential to note that the said PIL petition was filed by four non-governmental organisations (NGOs), namely Citizens for Justice and Peace, People’s Union for Civil Liberties, Forum against oppression of women, and Indian Muslims for Secular Democracy. The NGOs had submitted that the Court to issue directions against the implementation of the government resolution.

Major contentions raised in the PIL:

1. Prejudice and discriminatory- The resolution designated the head of the committee to be the Minister heading the State’s Ministry for Women and Children’s Development. The argument made in the petition, filed through advocate Rishika Agarwal, claimed that the committee’s establishment was prejudiced and discriminatory towards specific religious communities as well as all women. It was further contended that the committee formulation promoted divisiveness rather than creating peace and coexistence among various religious factions.

“By using the inherently questionable protection of women as a paradigm and tracing inter-religious relationships only through women, the Maharashtra government is displaying discrimination on basis of gender as also denying women their own agency and choice,” the petition had stated.

2. Violation of fundamental rights of women- The petition had argued that the fundamental rights of women guaranteed under Articles 14 (right to equality), 15 (prohibition of discrimination on the ground of religion, race, caste, gender, or place of birth), 19 (freedom of speech and expression) and 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution were being violated.
3. Lack of data safety and accountability- Additionally, the petition also contended that the resolution failed to place any measures to protect the data and information collected by the committee.

“There is no security and accountability provided in terms of data collection, making it exceptionally vulnerable to be misused, apart from being a direct violation of the fundamental right to privacy of two consenting married adults” the plea stated.

4. Violation of privacy, question on requirement- The petition further emphasized that there had been no prior research on the actual need for constituting such a committee. It added that the resolution was a violation of the right to privacy. Even if it were to be accepted as reasonable, the same ought to have been done by a legislation and not through an executive decision, the petitioners had contended.

“The right to privacy guaranteed under Constitution of India is not taken away merely because the woman has married outside her faith”, the petition had stated further.

Background of the Maharashtra government resolution

On December 13, 2022, the Maharashtra Government had issued the impugned Government Resolution, cashing in on the gruesome murder of Shraddha Walkar in Delhi allegedly by her inter-faith live-in partner. It was purported that the committee was meant to provide a platform to ‘counsel, communicate and resolve’ issues between couples and families. According to the GR, the committee could intervene at the behest of any person, which the plea alleges is a breach of the couple’s privacy “especially when two consenting adults are married to each other”. Furthermore, it was provided that the committee can seek information of both registered and unregistered marriages.

Related:

Maharashtra interfaith committee to submit report by end April

Plea against Maha GR to monitor inter-faith & inter-caste marriages: Bombay HC

Even after 3 months, zero cases filed before the Maha Inter-faith Marriage-Family Coordination Committee: Maharashtra Women and Development Ministry

Plea against Maha GR to monitor inter-faith & inter-caste marriages: Bombay HC

Only Inter-faith marriages under Maha govt scanner; earlier GR was incorrect says Fadnavis

The post Bombay HC issues notice seeking response from Maha government on formulation of inter-faith marriage committee appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Last year, the Maharashtra government had announced the formation of a panel on inter-faith marriages, which had sparked concern amongst many. Now, as per a response received by Samajwadi Party MLA Rais Shaikh from the government ministry, even after months have passed since the setting up of the 12 member Inter-faith Marriage-Family Coordination Committee, there are currently zero cases before the panel.

On February 16, the Samajwadi Party MLA had written to the Maharashtra Women and Development Ministry, inquiring about the number of cases before the committee till date, and their details. On Monday, March 20, Rais Shaikh received a response stating that there was currently no case before the committee, as reported by Hindustan Times.

This comes just days after Mangal Prabhat Lodha, Maharashtra Women and Child Development Minister and BJP leader, had announced that the state of Maharashtra had over one lakh ‘love jihad’ cases. The BJP leader made the remark during the Maharashtra Assembly Budget Session. Lodha had stated that “Maharashtra had more than one lakh cases of love jihad, which upset society.” he had then said that “the state government’s interfaith marriage committee has no say in anyone’s personal life or religion. But we want to avoid another Shraddha Walkar case. This is the government’s responsibility.”

Pursuant to this, the SP state president and MLA, Abu Asim Azmi, announced that he has filed a privilege motion against the minister for making false claims in the state assembly. “However, no response has yet been received from the legislature administration.” Azmi had further stated that if the privilege motion against Lodha is not approved by the Assembly, he will take the minister to court. “A group of people is attempting to polarise Maharashtra by making bogus claims of ‘love jihad,’ which are far from the reality on the ground,” he said, as was reported by the Hindustan Times.

Mangal Prabhat Lodha had also claimed last month that the 12-member committee had already received 152 complaints, which was obviously misleading information as it has now been revealed that the committee has not received a single complaint. R. Vimla, commissioner, women and child development, confirmed that the committee has not received a single complaint. She also serves on the interfaith committee, which is led by Lodha.

Plea challenging interfaith marriage panel allowed to be filed as PIL

On March 20, a writ petition filed by Samajwadi Party MLA Rais Shaikh challenging the Maharashtra government’s resolution (GR) setting up the interfaith marriage family coordination committee was allowed by the Bombay High Court to be filed as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL). Rais Shaikh had filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court challenging the Maharashtra Government notification on March 9.

 The petition stated that the government resolution is discriminatory against a particular religion and is violative of Articles 14 (right to equality), Article 15 (forbidding discrimination), 21 (right to life which includes the right to privacy), and 25.

“That the assumption that adult women who choose and consent to marry someone from another faith need to be ‘saved’ is misplaced and goes against the spirit of the Constitution,” the plea states adding that, “without the couple having any control on who has access to their private information (GR) is contributory to the ever ongoing campaign of the parents, vigilante groups & society to control the lives of young people who have decided to choose their own partners.”

Thus, through the plea now allowed filed as a PIL, Shaikh claims that the government resolution aims to create a false narrative and negatively influence public perception of a specific religious sect, that it is discriminatory against a specific religion, and that it encourages division among people rather than harmony, coexistence, assimilation, and peace.

Brief about the government resolution and the panel

The Maharashtra Government had issued the impugned GR on December 13, 2022 following the gruesome murder of Shraddha Walkar in Delhi allegedly by her inter-faith live-in partner and the committee is allegedly meant to provide a platform to ‘counsel, communicate and resolve’ issues between couples and families. According to the GR, the committee can intervene at the behest of any person, which the plea alleges is a breach of the couple’s privacy “especially when two consenting adults are married to each other”. According to the GR, the committee can seek information of both registered and unregistered marriages. 

Related:

Plea against Maha GR to monitor inter-faith & inter-caste marriages: Bombay HC

Three States have demanded caste census, says MHA

State has no business to know if a person has changed religion: Deepak Gupta former SC Judge

Uttarakhand further amends its ‘anti-conversion law, maximum sentence up to 10 years 

Only Inter-faith marriages under Maha govt scanner; earlier GR was incorrect says Fadnavis

M’tra Govt’s move to set up “Commission” on inter-caste, interfaith marriages strongly opposed by women’s groups, Opposition

The post Even after 3 months, zero cases filed before the Maha Inter-faith Marriage-Family Coordination Committee: Maharashtra Women and Development Ministry appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Within two days of issuing a GR for forming a committee to get “detailed information about couples in interfaith and inter-caste marriages”, the Maharashtra government has conveniently removed inter-caste marriages from its scope, proving the critics right. What seemed to many as a harmless exercise to protect women and to reunite estranged women with their maternal families, is clearly a step towards monitoring inter-faith marriages in the State.

As rightly pointed out by women’s rights groups and parties in opposition, this move is nothing but a means to push the government’s sectarian agenda and an attempt to impinge upon people’s right to privacy.

As reported by Indian Express, the new GR stated that the panel had been renamed ‘Interfaith Marriage-Family Coordination Committee (state level)’ and “it was under the government’s consideration to amend the committee that was set up”.

“To stop fraud in the name of love jihad”

Speaking to The Indian Express, Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis said, “Tuesday’s GR of the WCD department has been amended. This committee is only for interfaith marriages, and not inter-caste marriages. The earlier GR was not the correct one.”

“The state government is encouraging inter-caste marriages and there is also a plan to give financial rewards to those who do it. But cheating in interfaith marriages has increased in the past few years and some aspects have come to light in the Shraddha Walkar murder case,” he added. He also said that , “It is alarming that there has been an increase in cases of cheating in interfaith marriages in some parts of the state. Therefore, fraud in the name of love jihad has to be stopped”.

Gujarat in late 90s

A similar move was seen in Gujarat in 1998-1990 when the state police dedicated certain cells to “investigate cases of inter-community and inter-caste marriages.” The Gujarat police set up the special cells to ‘investigate’ inter-community marriages and was an act of the state that is directly violative of the fundamental rights of equality before the law, Right to Life with Dignity and Right to Freedom of Faith. This was followed by massive resistance and disenchantment of people and a spate of writ petitions were even filed by couples who had voluntarily entered into marriage before the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court.

Ms Teesta Setalvad had conducted an interview then with Gujarat’s Director General of Police, C.P. Singh in Ahmedabad, telephonically from Mumbai on October 6, 1998, wherein he claimed that allegations of forced inter–religious marriages and conversions are entirely baseless in most cases. When he was asked about who was responsible for the disturbing spate of attacks on minorities — Christians and Muslims — in Gujarat since February, 1998 he said, “It is individuals not organisations that can be arrested and nailed. But one thing was clear in the pattern of incidents. It was reportedly the activists of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal activists who were taking law into their own hands which posed a serious danger to peace in Gujarat. Many of the attacks on the minorities were after these organisations had whipped up local passions on mere allegations of conversions (by Christian missionaries) and allegedly forced inter–religious marriages, where again conversion was supposed to be the alleged motive.”

Under the garb of giving counselling to women estranged from their families due to being a part of inter-faith marriages, the State is setting up a surveillance mechanism that has the potential to disturb the state’s communal harmony, which has more or less remained unperturbed since the horrific Bombay riots of 1992-93.

Criticism

Many social organizations in the state opposed this decision of the government calling it ‘moral policing’ and infringement of people’s right to privacy. They have raised concern that this data will be misused to monitor potential inter-caste (in response to earlier GR) and interfaith marriages and to discourage the same with the apprehension that such couples could be harassed. They also state that the government is ignoring real issues being faced by women in the state and should instead focus on effective implementation of laws against domestic violence and crimes against women.

Maharashtra Mahila Parishad has said that “By Collecting data, the government intends to target particular communities”

Stree Mukti Andolan Sampark Samiti said that raised concerns that this data that will be collected will be used to monitor women and to shut any attempts at inter caste and inter faith marriages to keep the so-called “purity” of their castes and religions intact. The Samiti has termed this exercise of the Maharashtra government as ‘moral policing’ and one that has no legal sanction and has called for the cancellation of this GR.

State incentives for inter-faith marriages:

Several states, including Maharashtra have been moving up the path of social reforms attempting to encourage the idea of a caste less society, one that Dr. Babasaheb Aambedkar envisaged to liberate men and women from the shackles of regressive notions and critical religious texts. The State of Maharashtra had planned to provide special concessions such as fee waiver to the children born out of inter caste and inter-religion marriages. In 2018, the Social Justice Minister of Maharashtra had said that the couples where spouses are from different religions or castes have to face various problems, including social boycott and the threat of honour killing and hence, besides other aspects, a law in place will focus on what kind of protection can be given to the couples who are facing such threat. Honour is in the attempt to achieve that glory by encouraging States to come up with incentives to encourage inter faith unions. The Act and the Ordinance aims to take ten steps backward against the spirit of national unity and fraternity.

The Right to Love campaign run by Sushant Asha and Abhijit K in Maharashtra, both journalists cum social activists, helps inter religious couples facing opposition to avail protection by police, legal help to get marriage registered, counselling to deal with the mental pressure and also in finding job opportunities. With such laws in place impinging on your free will and right to conscience, the significance of the work and efforts put in by such individuals becomes even more stark.

Related:

M’tra Govt’s move to set up “Commission” on inter-caste, interfaith marriages strongly opposed by women’s groups, Opposition
Three States have demanded caste census, says MHA
State has no business to know if a person has changed religion: Deepak Gupta former SC Judge
Uttarakhand further amends its ‘anti-conversion law, maximum sentence up to 10 years 

The post Only Inter-faith marriages under Maha govt scanner; earlier GR was incorrect says Fadnavis appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Arbaz Aftab Mullah, a 24-year-old youth was found decapitated on the railway tracks in Belagavi on September 28. The news had failed to make it to the national discourse, till it came to light that he was “murdered” allegedly over his “interfaith relationship”. His mother Najeema Shaikh, a school teacher,  put it on record in her police complaint that she “suspected the father of the Hindu girl, with whom her son was involved”, and some others she stated were “associated with a radical right-wing group” of murdering her son. 

According to reports, a post-mortem investigation of Arbaz’s mutilated body has “revealed it to be a case of murder.” Najeema Shaikh named ‘Maharaj’, and another right-wing activist, who identified himself to her as ‘Birje’, in her complaint apart from the father of the Hindu girl. According to the Indian Express, the officers investigating the case have “some leads to indicate that Arbaz’s relationship with a Hindu girl had led to the murder” and that “all the accused have been identified”. Najeema Shaikh told the IE that she and the Hindu girl’s family were aware of the two-year-old relationship, “we were living in Khanapur (a taluk in Belagavi)… I spoke to the girl’s mother then to stop her from meeting Arbaz and I told Arbaz the same too. However, we were being threatened by their family, so we recently relocated to Belagavi city.”

She said that two days before her son went missing, they both met two Hindutva activists, one of whom she identified as ‘Maharaj’. “We were threatened with dire consequences and they told us to come near Khanapur to settle the matter. On September 26, Arbaz and I went there and, in their presence, Arbaz deleted all the photos of his girlfriend on his phone. They also took some money from us. They told me that there were at least a thousand people ready to lynch Arbaz and me. I requested them to allow us to lead a peaceful life and we left from there. Arbaz disposed of his old SIM card and took a new one too,” Najeema told the IE. On the fateful day, September 28, Najeema was reportedly in Goa for some work, and Arbaz was home till at least 5 P.M and had called her to ask “when I would be reaching home. I told him that I would reach by 7 P.M. Since I was worried for him, I told him to stay inside the house. When I returned, he was not home. We got to know that Arbaz was no more when police called the next day.”

A resident of Azam Nagar in Belagavi, Arbaz, was a civil engineering graduate who worked as a car dealer in Belagavi city, stated news reports. The railway police initially registered a case of unnatural death, after his body was found, however, the post-mortem revealed “stab injuries on the head, indicating that Arbaz was murdered” , reported Indian Express. 

Superintendent of Police (Railways) Siri Gowri said, “After the victim’s mother filed a complaint, we regisstered a case under IPC 302 (murder),” and the case was to be  transferred to the Belagavi district police.

Related:

Hate Watch: Communal hatred spread at Rajghat on October 2?

Jantar Mantar case: Hate monger Pinky Chaudhary granted bail

Hate Watch: Twitter influencer Mahesh Vikram Hegde shares anti-namaz video

The post Karnataka: Beheaded Muslim man’s mother names Hindutva activists, girl’s father appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Gujarat High Court has 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. At the August 19 hearing of a petition challenging the validity of the Act, Bench of Chief Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Biren Vaishnav had stayed the operation of Sections 3, 4, 4A to 4C, 5, 6, and 6A of the Act. 

After hearing the arguments of the AG Kamal Trivedi, the division bench of Chief Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Biren Vaishnav said, “We do not find any reason to make any changes in the order passed by us on August 19”. Trivedi had argued that section 5 was a part of the original unamended Act of 2003 and it has nothing to do with marriage per se. Trivedi submitted 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. 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.

Senior advocate Mihir Joshi appearing for the petitioner argued that if the stay on section 5 is lifted, then the court’s entire order won’t operate and it will become unenforceable. He also argued that if somebody wants to get married the presumption is that it is unlawful unless permission is taken under section 5.

“Today if I want to convert voluntarily without any allurement or force, or any fraudulent means, I can not seek permission as Section 5 is stayed. This section applies to normal conversions too,” Trivedi argued.

To this the Chief Justice, as reported by LiveLaw, said, “Prior to the amendment, marriage was not under Section 3, but now, because of marriage coming into section 3, a conversion for marriage would also require section 5 permission. So, in that sense, we have only stayed in the context of marriage. We have stayed Section 5 with respect to marriages only. We have not stayed Section 5 as a whole.”

Even Justice Biren Vashinav reportedly remarked, “You will haul up a person by saying that no previous permission was taken under Section 5, even if the marriage is lawful and the interfaith marriage is by consent, you will say breach of section 5.”

Trivedi asked, “The other sections which have been stayed are related to marriage, while section 5 is for legal voluntary conversion. Under that section, if someone goes to the priest, the priest has to take the permission. It deals with lawful conversion. Why a section dealing with lawful conversion should be stayed?” 

The Chief Justice said that as per its order “rigors of Section 3, 4, 4A to 4C, 5, 6, and 6A shall not operate merely because marriage is solemnized by a person of one religion with another religion without force or allurement or fraudulent means and such marriages cannot be termed as marriages for the purposes of unlawful conversion.” He clarified that the court has not stayed permission required for lawful conversion of any individual. It has only stayed permission required for marriage.

Previous hearings

At the first hearing itself the bench was displeased with some provisions of the Act. “Either you say if there is marriage by force or fraudulent means and then there is conversion, then of course, it is not right, fair enough. But if you say only because of marriage, someone converts and so it is an offence (it is not correct),” the bench had said.

At the August 19 hearing, the AG had requested the Bench to clarify their position in circumstances where an interfaith marriage does result in forceful conversion, and to state that the sections should then apply. To this, the Chief Justice said, “You have to have a basic argument that its forceful conversion, either there is force or allurement….that’s all that we have said!” The court clarified that something “basic” has to be there to show that there is force or fraud or allurement in the inter-faith marriage. In the absence of this, the amended law would not apply.

On August 17, the government had argued that interfaith marriage is not prohibited under the Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021, however, using it as a tool or instrument for effecting forceful conversion is not allowed. The original Act of 2003 prohibited conversion by force or allurement, however the 2021 amendment makes “conversion by marriage” an offence which is one of the many common threads between the anti-conversion laws passed in Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh as well.

In related news, Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), SabrangIndia’s sister organisation, has also approached the Supreme Court challenging the anti-conversion laws passed by the governments of Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, citing issues like privacy, dignity and autonomy of women, equality and secularism.

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
Gujarat Assembly passes Freedom of Religion Amendment Bill, 2021
Gujarat’s anti-conversion law reflective of a patriarchal and prejudiced mindset: Fr. Cedric Prakash

The post Guj HC refuses to remove stay on Sec 5 of anti-conversion law appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Gujarat High Court Bench of Chief Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Biren Vaishnav has passed an interim order ruling that the provisions of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021, will not apply to inter-faith marriages that take place without force, allurement or fraudulent means.

The Chief Justice Vikram Nath announced in open court, “After recording the preliminary submissions and arguments advanced, we have directed as follows. We are therefore of the opinion that pending further hearing, the rigours of Section 3, 4, 4A to 4C, 5, 6, and 6A 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.”

Section 3 prohibits forcible conversion from one religion to another by use of force or by allurement or by fraudulent means, or by aiding a person to get married by allurement or by fraudulent means. Section 4, 4A to 4C prescribes punishment of imprisonment for unlawful conversion, declares marriages by unlawful conversion as void, and also deals with offences of organisations doing unlawful conversion. Section 5 penalises persons who have abetted the crime of forceful conversion and section 6 places the burden of proof on the accused.

The Chief Justice added, “The above interim order is provided only on the lines of arguments made by the learned Advocate General Mr. Trivedi and to protect the parties solemnising their inter-faith marriage from being unnecessarily harassed.”

After passing the interim order, Advocate General Kamal Trivedi, appearing for the State, requested the Bench to clarify their position in circumstances where an interfaith marriage does result in forceful conversion and to state that the sections should then apply.

To this, the Chief Justice said, “You have to have a basic argument that its forceful conversion, either there is force or allurement….that’s all that we have said!” The court clarified that something “basic” has to be there to show that there is force or fraud or allurement in the inter-faith marriage. In the absence of this, the amended law would not apply.

On August 17, the government had argued that interfaith marriage is not prohibited under the Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021, however, using it as a tool or instrument for effecting forceful conversion is not allowed. The original Act of 2003 prohibited conversion by force or allurement, however the 2021 amendment makes “conversion by marriage” an offence which is one of the many common threads between the anti-conversion laws passed in Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh as well.

In August, the Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021 was challenged before the court and a notice was issued to the government of Gujarat by the Bench. (Jamiat Ulama-E-Hind Gujarat vs State of Gujarat, R/SCA/10304 of 2021). During the hearing held on August 5, the bench had also orally expressed its displeasure over the changes brought about in the law. It had orally remarked, “Either you say if there is marriage by force or fraudulent means and then there is conversion, then of course, it is not right, fair enough. But if you say only because of marriage, someone converts and so it is an offence (it is not correct).”

The Bench had opined that if an inter-religious marriage is without coercion or fraudulent means then it should not be treated as an offence. State counsel Manisha Luvkumar contended that the object of the Act is to check relationships wherein one says that the marriage will not take place unless the spouse converts. To this, Chief Justice Vikram Nath had reportedly responded, “It is between the two individuals”. 

In related news, Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), SabrangIndia’s sister organisation, has also approached the Supreme Court challenging the anti-conversion laws passed by the governments of Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh citing issues like privacy, dignity and autonomy of women, equality and secularism.

The complete order may be read here:

Related:

Gujarat gov’t counsel explores different interpretation of conversion by marriage
Gujarat Freedom of Religion Act challenged, HC issues notice
CJP’s Love Jihad amendment petition allowed by SC
CJP moves SC against “Love Jihad” laws

The post Anti-conversion law will not apply to inter-faith marriages unless there is force, fraud, allurement: Gujarat HC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Narayan Singh of the Uttarakhand High Court (Nainital Bench) has issued directions to the Superintendent of Police and District Magistrate, Haridwar to provide protection to two adults in a case of conversion from the petitioner’s family and also conduct a detailed enquiry in the matter.

The petitioner converted to Muslim faith on December 20, 2020 and married a Muslim man (the other petitioner) the next day. However, the couple failed to give prior information of conversion or marriage to the concerned District Magistrate, nor the person who had performed such conversion gave one month’s advance notice to the District Magistrate, violating section 8 (2) of the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018.

As the couple was allegedly facing harassment and opposition from their family members, they sought police protection from the High Court since they anticipated physical harm from them. The court recognised this apprehension and granted protection but did not let the couple go easy for violating the provisions of the Act.

It said, “purely in the interest of justice and considering the fact that the petitioners have a reasonable apprehension to their life and liberty at the hands of private respondent nos. 3 to 6 (father, brother and neighbour of the woman petitioner), we direct the Senior Superintendent of Police, Haridwar to grant the petitioners full protection forthwith. After granting the said protection, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Haridwar shall also file an immediate report before this Court within twenty-four hours thereafter.”

It added, “We also direct the District Magistrate, Haridwar to conduct a detailed inquiry into this matter, as many similar cases are repeatedly coming before us. Our intention is to inform the concerned persons about the illegalities and the legal implications in the matter, so that a prior information is given to the concerned District Magistrate, which is the mandate of law. In all similar cases, which are coming before us, we find that such intimation is not given under sub-section (2) of Section 8 of the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018 by the concerned Priest.”

Finally, the court concluded by directing the District Magistrate, Haridwar to conduct an inquiry in all the aspects and listed the matter for consideration on March 19, 2021.

The order may be read here:

Related:

Allahabad HC reunites interfaith couple, provides police protection
Allahabad HC protects man booked under UP ‘love jihad’ law
Cannot intervene if adult marries as per choice and converts: Cal HC

The post Prior notice to DM for inter faith marriage mandatory: Uttarakhand HC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

A Gujarat based interfaith couple, in their 20’s had eloped and registered their nikahnama in Bandra, Mumbai a couple of days back. R.A. Jadeja, police inspector of Karelibaug police station, told The Indian Express that the couple came back to Vadodara but they felt intimidated by the tension in the neighbourhood and sought protection.

Even though their marriage was considered “valid” by the Gujarat police, they have been sent back to their respective families instead of residing together as a married couple. Jadeja told the media, “They are adults and have told us that they married each other with consent. The girl converted to Islam and they had a nikah ceremony in Mumbai, So, we cannot book them under the prevailing law of Gujarat where conversion for marriage requires the consent of the collector. Had they married here without such consent; we could have booked the case but there is no such law in Maharashtra.”

The nightmare did not end there, as police officials attached to the Karelibaug police station in Vadodara had to reportedly physically stop the entry of some people into the thana to protest against the newly wed couple on the night of December 16. As the Police anticipated a law-and-order problem, they sent the couple back to their respective parent’s home.

The Indian Express has further reported that some right wing Bhartiya Janta Party leaders including Ranjan Bhatt, Seema Mohile, party city President Dr. Vijay Shah and erstwhile Mayor Sunil Solanki met the 23-year-old woman and counselled her to rethink her marriage with the Muslim man. They elucidated the pros and cons of her marriage to her now husband.

Bhatt also spoke to the media and said, “The girl is extremely disturbed but she is opening up now and beginning to understand the importance of what everyone is trying to tell her. Their decision to elope and marry is not good for both of them. They are college dropouts and have only completed HSC. Neither of them has a stable income. As elders, we are advising her to think of practical life. Their marriage will not last more than a few months once reality strikes.”

According to Bhatt, the couple was warmly received by the boy’s family and when they started looking for a house, she registered the rent deal under a Hindu name although she has now converted to Islam. Bhatt further remarked, “We just wish good for both the children. They are not mature enough to make such a decision. So, we are trying to counsel the girl to agree to seek an annulment and build her life.”

Affirming that they will help the couple and support their decision, Ranjan Bhatt also told the media that they have “advised” the couple’s family to cool off for four days and decide the next course of action over whether they could sort out the matter within the two households. But is there a matter that needs to be sorted out?

Referring to this incident, party MLA Shailesh Mehta has also written to the Chief Minister Vijay Rupani for an anti-love jihad law in the State citing many instances of rising “cases of Hindu girls being lured by a particular minority community”.

Apart from Uttar Pradesh, States like Karnataka, Haryana are looking at bringing in anti-conversion laws. Madhya Pradesh, which already has a Freedom of Religion Act, is set to introduce a new law which will be an extension of the Beti Bachao Andolan. Chief Minister Shivraj Singh told the media that it is time to “save the daughters”, sending out a strong message that those who cheat them will not be spared.

In another case of heaping injustice, yesterday, on December 18, a young 19-year-old Muslim boy was booked under the Uttar Pradesh love Jihad law by the Meerut Police and arrested on charges of enticing a minor girl allegedly by concealing his original identity and attempting to coerce her into conversion. He has also been charged for kidnapping under the Indian Penal Code and relevant sections of POCSO and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, reported the HT.

Amid this chaos, one of the first cases under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion Ordinance was heard before the Allahabad High Court which directed that no coercive action will be taken against the alleged accused, staying his arrest, as the FIR was registered on mere suspicions. The court also noted that the right to privacy, conscience and choice is indispensable. (Nadeem Khan v State of UP and ors CMWP No. 16302 of 2020)

Related:

Allahabad HC protects man booked under UP ‘love jihad’ law

CJP moves SC against “Love Jihad” laws

UP: ‘Love Jihad’ law catches pace, 2 cases registered in Bareilly

The post Gujarat: Are BJP leaders counseling women against inter faith marriages? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Allahabad High Court in its recent judgment opposed the conversion to get married to the person of another faith. The logic is that in the Special Marriages act, interfaith marriages are totally acceptable. One Muslim woman had converted to Hinduism to get married to a Hindu man. Talking in this aftermath the UP Chief Minister launched a tirade against Muslim men. As per him many Muslim youth hide their religious identity, lure the Hindu girls and then convert them to Islam. They will be dealt with sternly and their own funeral processions (Ram Naam Satya Hai) will be taken out.

In a strict warning he said that such incidents will not be allowed, his Government will come out with a law against it. He also said that posters will be put up of those indulging in such activities. As if on the cue, Haryana Chief Minster Manohar Lal Khattar, another BJP ruled state came forward with the resolve of his Government to bring a law against such interfaith marriages, Muslim boy-Hindu girls, which are referred to by the derogatory ‘Love Jihad’, which by now has become a sort of provocation for violence., as witnessed in the case of Muzzafarnagar violence of UP in 2013.

In contrast to these hyperbole speeches by BJP leaders the number of cases of interfaith marriages is handful. There are both types of such marriages. One does recall the marriage of Trinmul Congress MP, Nusrat Jahan to a Hindu and the way she was trolled. Selectively case of Nikita Tomar, who was murdered by a Muslim man, in which case Tausif and Rehan have been arrested and hash tag #KshtriyaLivesMatter is making the rounds is also being projected as an attempted love jihad. Officially speaking  G.Kishan Reddy, Junior minister in Home Ministry had stated in Parliament that there is no such category as love jihad. He also pointed this out while replying to a question by a Kerala MP, about love Jihad cases in Kerala. As per him the cases were investigated and not found to be the one related to coercion etc.

Love Jihad had come to fore in a big way in case of Akhila. This Hindu girl had married a Muslim man; and had changed her name to Hadiya. After the long battle the Supreme Court upheld her right to her choice and overruling the Kerala High Court verdict and permitted her to stay with her husband. Again we witnessed the same in case of recently released and then withdrawn Tanishq advertisement. In this ad a Hindu bride, looking happy and cheerful is surprised that a Hindu ritual of God Bharai (Baby Shower) is being organized for her in her husband’s Muslim household. The communalists not only trolled this ad but also declared a boycott of Tanishq products. Under the threat of this the company buckled and withdrew the ad. The charge was same that such advertisements promote Love Jihad.

This time around apart from the types of steps being outlined by the UP and Haryana Chief Ministers, what is being dished out is a series of advices to the parents of Hindu girls to keep a watch on them, to whom they talk, their mobile phone messages and their movements. Clearly control mechanisms are being devised to keep a control on the lives of girls/women. Control over the lives of women is one of the agenda of the communal politics. Communal politics seems to be operating on the ground of ‘hate minorities’, Muslim and also partly Christians. Its other components are to push the caste equations to the pre-democratic times and also to intensify the patriarchal control, which has the danger of weakening in the democratic society. In the wake of rising education among girls in particular, the social interactions between opposite sex do go up.

As such this patriarchy is the integral part of the communal politics everywhere. It may be Muslim communalism or Christian fundamentalism, patriarchal control is the core of their agenda.

In case of Hindu Communalism, showing the threat of Hindu women being converted to Islam has part of communal propaganda. Hindutva ideologue Savarkar; in his writings chastises Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, a great icon for Hindu communalists, for leaving alone the daughter-in-law of Bassien’s Subhedar, a Muslim, who was brought to her as a gift by his soldiers. It is precisely for this reason that Savarkar, despite being admirer of Shivaji on other counts did not include Shivaji’s reign in his ‘Six Golden Pages of Indian History’, the major book by him.

As Hindu communalism (parallel and opposite to Muslim communalism) developed in north India, the communalists projected the threat of rising Muslim population in India, way back in 1920s. Charu Gupta in her ‘Myth of Love jihad’ makes an interesting observation “Pamphlets with provocative titles like “Hindu Auraton ki Loot”, which denounced Muslim propaganda for proselytizing female preys, and “Hindu Striyon ki Loot ke Karan”, an Arya Samajist tract showing how to save “our” ladies from becoming Muslim, appeared at this time. The love jihad campaign of today, too, is using similar tropes.”

Not to be left behind RSS Chief Mohan Bhagwat reiterates that women should restricts themselves to household chores, while men should do the earning part.

In our large society multiple layers of life patterns are occurring at the same time. The interaction between people of different castes and religious communities is the natural phenomenon. It is this interaction which does bring people in close bandings, some of these leading to marital alliances. As such even inter caste marriage is not occurring in India in significant proportions. One of the prescriptions Babasaheb Ambedkar makes for ‘Annihilation of Caste’ is promotion of inter-caste marriages. We on the contrary are witnessing reverse phenomenon. In case of interfaith marriages the matters are worse. Here Hindu vigilantes and Muslim fanatics bay for the blood of those crossing the religious boundaries in matters of love and marriage.

Related:

Love-jihad’ Booklets Peddle Bias & Bigotry:Rajasthan Spiritual Fair

UP BJP Spokesperson calls consensual marriage ‘love jihad’

The post Bid Curb Inter-faith marriages: Ruse to Restrict Women’s Freedom 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.