Allahabad HC Refuses To Grant Protection To Interfaith Live-In Relationship Couple Citing Violation Of Anti-Unlawful Conversion Law

The Allahabad High Court recently dismissed a Writ Petition filed by two individuals, belonging to different religious communities, who are in a live-in relationship seeking protection of their right to live together peacefully as consenting adults by stating that the marriage between the two petitioners cannot be recognized at this stage due to the non-compliance with Section 8 and 9 of the U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021.

The Single Judge Bench of Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra in its order observed "It is stated that petitioners are distant cousin even having belong to different community on account of fact that mother and aunt of the petitioner no. 1 were Hindu by birth and the petitioner no. 2 belongs to maternal side of mother of petitioner no. 1. Prima facie it cannot be treated as matter of re-conversion. The version of petitioner no. 1 for performing marriage with petitioner no. 2 into Hindu religious cannot be given effect at this stage for want of compliance of Section 8 and 9 of the Act and the relief sought by the petitioners cannot be granted at this stage."

Advocate Abhitab Kumar Tiwari appeared for the Petitioners while Advocate Ashwani Kumar Tripathi appeared for the State of Uttar Pradesh. 

The High Court, in this case, dismissed the writ petition, stating that the marriage between the two petitioners cannot be recognized at this stage due to non-compliance with Sections 8 and 9 of the U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. However, the court suggested that the Petitioners can approach the District Magistrate to seek necessary orders under the Act, and if they obtain the required sanction, they can file a fresh petition before the court.

Section 8(1) of the Act provides that one who desires to convert his/her religion, shall give a declaration in the form prescribed as Scheduled (1) at least 60 days in advance, to the District Magistrate or the Additional District Magistrate specially authorized by the District Magistrate that he wishes to convert his/her religion on his/her own and with his/her free consent and without any force, coercion, undue influence or allurement.

While, Sub-section (3) provides that the District Magistrate on receiving information under Sub-section (1) and (2) shall get an inquiry conducted through police with regard to real intention, purpose and cause of the proposed religious conversion. Sub-section (4) provides that contravention of Sub-section (1) and/or sub-section (2) shall have the effect of running the proposed conversion illegal and void.

The Petitioners sought protection for their live-in relationship and requested that the respondents (specifically, the father of the girl) should not interfere in their married life. The petitioners claimed to have solemnized their marriage according to Hindu rites and rituals, and they were of different religious backgrounds (one Muslim and one Hindu). The petitioner girl who was originally Muslim had changed her name and religion to Hindu and sought protection against her family members, who were opposed to their relationship.

However, the State's Standing Counsel argued that their marriage comes under the legislative prohibition contained in the U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. According to this act, any conversion to another religion must comply with certain procedures, including giving a declaration 60 days in advance to the District Magistrate, ensuring that it is done without force or coercion, and undergoing an inquiry into the intention behind the conversion. Violation of these provisions could render the conversion illegal and void.

Considering the merits, the High Court did not grant immediate protection to the couple's live-in relationship due to the potential conflict with the U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. Instead, they were directed to follow the legal procedures outlined in the Act and reapply if they received the necessary sanction from the District Magistrate. 

Cause Title: Smt. Shraddha @ Jannat and Another v. State Of U.P. And 5 Others [WRIT - C No. - 23672 of 2023]

Click here to read/download the Order

I