Enter your keyword

8053+ OFFICERS SERVING THE NATION UNIVERSAL COACHING CENTRE Let's join hands together in bringing Your Name in Elite officers list. JOIN US 25 YEARS OF EXCELLENCE MEET NEW FRIENDS AND STUDY WITH EXPERTS JOIN US Nothing is better than having friends study together. Each student can learn from others through by teamwork building and playing interesting games. Following instruction of experts, you and friends will gain best scores.

ULP Click here! Click here! Classroom Programme NRA-CET Test Series
Click here ! Org code: XSHWV

post

ALLAHABAD HC HOLDS INTERFAITH MARRIAGES NOT PROHIBITED UNDER U.P. CONVERSION LAW

Why in the News?

  • Judicial Protection: Allahabad High Court granted police protection to 12 interfaith live-in couples in Uttar Pradesh.
  • Legal Clarification: Court held that interfaith marriages are not prohibited under the U.P. anti-conversion law in absence of conversion, reinforcing principles of environmental democracy and constitutional morality in judicial interpretation.

COURT’S INTERPRETATION OF U.P. CONVERSION LAW

  • Statutory Scope: Court clarified that the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 applies only where actual unlawful conversion occurs, rejecting any ex post facto or post facto application of penal provisions.
  • No Conversion Element: Since none of the petitioners converted religion, provisions relating to Sections 8 and 9 were inapplicable, similar to how ex-post environmental clearances cannot legitimize violations.
  • Marriage Legality: The Act does not prohibit interfaith marriages per se, unless accompanied by coercive or fraudulent conversion.
  • State Argument Rejected: Court dismissed contention that interfaith live-in relationships were unlawful without conversion compliance.
  • Penal Threshold: Law targets conversions through misrepresentation, force, undue influence, fraud or allurement, not consensual adult relationships.

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOM OF CHOICE

  • Article 21 Protection: Court emphasised protection of life and personal liberty irrespective of religious identity, extending to right to pollution free environment as recognized in environmental jurisprudence.
  • Equality Principle: Reinforced Article 14 and 15, prohibiting discrimination on basis of religion, caste, creed or sex, applying precautionary principle in protecting fundamental rights.
  • Autonomy Doctrine: Recognised adult individuals’ freedom of choice in relationships, including live-in arrangements, consistent with constitutional principles including polluter pays principle in ensuring accountability.
  • Unity in Diversity: Court highlighted constitutional commitment to pluralism and social harmony.
  • State Obligation: Declared it is bounden duty of the State to ensure protection of citizens’ privacy and liberty, similar to obligations under Vanashakti judgment regarding environmental protection.

RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND FREEDOM OF CHOICE UNDER ARTICLE 21

  Constitutional Guarantee: Article 21 ensures protection of life and personal liberty, expanded through judicial interpretation to include right to pollution free environment and environmental democracy.

  Judicial Precedent: Supreme Court has recognised right to privacy and autonomy as intrinsic to dignity, alongside environmental jurisprudence principles including precautionary principle and polluter pays principle.

  Marriage Freedom: Courts have upheld adults’ right to choose partners under constitutional morality principles, rejecting ex post facto restrictions on fundamental rights.

  Anti-Conversion Debate: State laws must balance public order concerns with individual freedoms, similar to balancing development needs with environmental impact assessment requirements under EIA notification and forest conservation act compliance.

  UPSC Relevance: Topic aligns with GS Paper II, covering fundamental rights, judicial review, constitutional governance, and environmental jurisprudence including coastal regulation zone protection and environmental clearances framework.