A three-judge bench was formulated for the case of Priyanshi @ Km Shamreen & Ors v. State of UP and 3 Ors, wherein the petitioner approached the court after the Allahabad High Court passed its judgement disinclined towards the petitioner.
Brief facts of the case
The suit was filed by a Muslim woman in the Allahabad High Court, after she changed her religion from Islam to Hindu, in order to marry a Hindu man. She sought the law’s shelter in order to refrain the state from interfering in her peaceful and happy, married life.
The suit was filed after Yogi Adityanath, the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh cited that this marriage raised the issue of “Love Jihad” and invoked “Raam Naam Satya”, a Hindu funeral chant, there-by, threatening inter-religious couples, and marriages.
The petitioner challenged the judgement passed by the High Court in Supreme Court and further submitted that the order passed by the Allahabad High Court sets a ‘wrong precedent’ by refusing to provide police protection to the inter-faith married couple, providing that converting religion for the purpose of marriage was unacceptable.
Judgement
A bench of Chief Justice S.A. Bobde, Justices A. S. Bopanna, and J. Ramasubramanian was constructed for the hearing.
During the hearing, CJI Bobde remarked,
“Can’t you go to the High Court? article 32 is not an appropriate remedy to set aside as order of the HC. You can seek approval of the court if you are not an affected party, to file an SLP.”
The petitioner submitted that if the circumstances are not extraordinary, the order passed by the High Court should be declared improper. The petition also stated that the High Court order has left the couple to their offended family members.
The Special Marriage Act, 1954 provides for inter-faith marriages, but the cumbersome process of following the steps provided under the Law is very cumbersome which basically forces people to covert their religions for the purpose of marriage.
The Constitution of India provides for the Right to Freedom of Religion, which implies the Right to Choose their Religion and the Right to convert to a religion of their choice. The choice of religion is a personal choice, and if the court declines the right to choose the religion, it will amount to a violation of their Fundamental Rights, as guaranteed under the Constitution of India to its people/citizen.
Supreme Court dismissed the PIL filed by the petitioner wherein the court ordered that conversion just for the purpose of marriage is unacceptable and said that the Allahabad HC has already set aside the order in question and therefore, that will be followed.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgement from the court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also contribute blog, articles, story tip, judgment and many more and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.
