Blog

INTRODUCTION

Interfaith marriages, also known as mixed marriages, involve unions between individuals from different religious backgrounds. As Peterson succinctly describes, these unions encompass couples whose divergent religious beliefs may potentially lead to conflicts, he quotes, “marriage between any two people from such diverse backgrounds that their differences in religious values are possible causes of conflict”.[1] In countries like India, characterized by a rich tapestry of religious diversity and a history marked by religious intolerance, the potential for such conflicts is significant. The multitude of religions and castes, combined with various permutations, underscores the vast array of possible combinations.

In India, traditional arranged marriages prevail, contrasting with the Western notion of ‘love marriages’ Arranged marriages involve parental selection of spouses based on criteria such as caste, religion, mother tongue, and economic status. Conversely, in love marriages, individuals choose their partners based on compatibility and affection developed through pre-marital interactions. This shift from arranged to love marriages has led to an increasing prevalence of interfaith unions, as religious beliefs often play a lesser role in partner selection.

However, interfaith marriages are often met with disapproval in Indian society. Deep-seated beliefs and ideologies contribute to this disapproval, with parents expressing concerns about compatibility and religious adherence. Despite this societal resistance, interfaith marriages have been legalized in India through the Special Marriage Act (SMA)[2]. While interfaith unions cannot be solemnized under specific religious marriage acts, they can be registered under the SMA.

Despite the legal recognition of interfaith marriages, couples still face threats of violence, often from their own families and communities. This raises questions about the adequacy of legal provisions in protecting interfaith couples from hostility and ensuring their safety.

What does History say about Interfaith marriages?

Exploring Hindu mythology unveils a longstanding acceptance of love marriages, evident in ancient texts where such unions were termed as “Gandharva vivaha”[3]. In this ancient tradition, the essence of marriage rested solely on the mutual love and consent between the individuals involved. A quintessential illustration of Gandharva vivaha resonates in the epic Mahabharata, exemplified by the union of Dushyant and Shakuntala, whose lineage includes the illustrious Pandavas and Kauravas. However, it’s crucial to acknowledge that the concept of Gandharva Vivaha has been subject to historical debate, with scholars questioning its authenticity as a distinct form of marriage.

Turning to more contemporary history, the advocacy of “the fusion of blood” by B.R. Ambedkar emerges prominently. He fervently championed intermarriage as a means to address the scourge of caste and religious discrimination. Ambedkar espoused the notion that the amalgamation of diverse bloodlines could engender a profound sense of kinship, essential for eradicating divisive sentiments[4].

In alignment with this vision, Articles 14, 15, and 21 were enshrined in the constitution as fundamental rights[5], safeguarding an individual’s autonomy to choose their life partner without constraint.

The case of Lata Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr [6] is a landmark judgment that has clarified the validity of inter-caste marriages. It can be observed from the court’s decision that any person who is a major has a right to choose the partner of their choice. It can be further considered to be a part of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The act of violence caused by the family members due to the inter-caste or different religion marriage is considered to be a barbaric practice which is unjust as it would be a curtailment of the fundamental right of a person because of some people’s feudal mindsets.

The court further opinionated that a family having a problem with such marriages can stop maintaining social relations with the couple and leave them but they do not have the authority to instigate violence against the married couple for that.  The court stated “In our opinion, such acts of violence or threats or harassment are wholly illegal and those who commit them must be severely punished. This is a free and democratic country, and once a person becomes a major, he or she can marry whosoever he/she likes.”

India’s deep-rooted casteism and religionism are obstacles to a progressive nation. It is important to protect the interests of the youth who are carrying out inter-caste or different religion marriages as they pave the way to discard the toxic discrimination present within India. This landmark judgment has clarified that the Hindu Marriage Act does not prohibit inter-caste marriage and it has made it clear that major women marrying outside their caste is not wrong or prohibited by the law [7].

LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN PLACE

In India, marriages are typically governed by the personal laws corresponding to the religion adhered to by the couple. However, when individuals from different faiths intend to marry legally, they have two avenues available:

• SPECIAL MARRIAGE ACT, 1954:

Couples can opt to have their marriage formalized under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. This Act offers a secular framework for individuals of diverse religious backgrounds to marry legally, without necessitating either party to embrace the other’s faith. It provides a non-religious alternative for marriages and ensures legal recognition of the union.

This legislation enables couples, regardless of their religious or caste affiliations, to enter into marriage. Nevertheless, the process for formalizing such unions is notably more stringent compared to the procedures outlined in personal laws.

Provisions:

Sec.5 of SMA, Notice of intended marriage ―When a marriage is intended to be solemnized under this Act, the parties to the marriage shall give notice thereof in writing in the form specified in the Second Schedule to the Marriage Officer of the district in which at least one of the parties to the marriage has resided for a period of not less than thirty days immediately preceding the date on which such notice is given.

Sec.6 of SMA, Marriage Notice Book and publication ―(1) The Marriage Officer shall keep all notices given under sec.5 with the records of his office and shall also forthwith enter a true copy of every such notice in a book prescribed for that purpose, to be called the Marriage Notice Book. (2) The Marriage Officer shall cause every such notice to be published by affixing a copy thereof to some conspicuous place in his office[8].

Sec.7 of SMA, Objection to marriage ― Within 30 days of such publication, anyone can object to such a marriage violating any conditions of a valid marriage[9].

In certain districts, vigilante groups espousing anti-“love jihad” sentiments vigilantly monitor notice boards for announcements of interreligious marriages. Upon discovering such unions, these groups often inform the parents or families involved, thereby amplifying the potential for conflict and coercion.

Moreover, the criteria stipulated by the SMA, such as the absence of existing spouses or mental incapacity, are consistent with those found in personal laws governing marriage. Thus, it raises a valid question as to why interfaith couples are subjected to additional scrutiny and obstacles not imposed on couples marrying under personal laws.

In essence, while the SMA aims to provide a legal framework for interfaith unions, the implementation of its provisions, particularly the 30-day notice period, often exacerbates societal tensions and compromises the fundamental rights of individuals. Addressing these challenges requires a reevaluation of the SMA’s procedures to safeguard the autonomy and safety of interfaith couples while upholding the principles of equality and freedom of choice in marriage.

Sec.14 of SMA, New notice when marriage not solemnized within three months.

Furthermore, it is imperative to address the issue of government officials overstepping their authority. An amendment to the Special Marriage Act should be considered to safeguard couples from such officers who engage in moral policing, dissuading them from marriage, or obstructing the solemnization process. Instances have arisen where these officers have taken it upon themselves to notify the families of the couples, despite no such mandate existing within the Act. This egregious breach of privacy infringes upon the rights of couples seeking marriage. Therefore, stringent provisions must be implemented to ensure that marriage officers adhere strictly to their duties and refrain from interfering with the couple’s decision to marry[10].

• RELIGIOUS CONVERSION:

Alternatively, one partner may choose to convert to the religion of the other and adopt its practices. Subsequently, they can proceed with their marriage ceremony under the personal laws of the converted religion. For instance, if a woman is Muslim and a man is Hindu, either the man may decide to embrace Islam or the woman may opt for Hinduism. Following this conversion, they can lawfully marry under the personal laws applicable to either Islam or Hinduism.

These options offer legal pathways for individuals from different religious backgrounds to formalize their marriage in India, promoting inclusivity and accommodating diverse religious preferences within the legal framework. Couples seeking to circumvent the cumbersome process of marriage under the Special Marriage Act (SMA) may opt for the alternative of converting to each other’s religion. However, this approach presents two significant challenges.

Firstly, it’s crucial to acknowledge that individuals may not willingly choose to convert, but may feel compelled to do so due to lack of alternatives. They may desire to maintain their religious beliefs while still marrying the person of their choice, a reasonable expectation.

Secondly, religious conversion for marriage is fraught with difficulties in India, particularly due to anti-conversion laws, which will be discussed further ahead.

CASE LAWS:

• Stainislaus vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Others: [11]

Rev. Stainislaus, the appellant, was sanctioned for prosecution by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Baloda-Bazar for committing offenses under Sections 3, 4, and 5(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Act, which in broader respect is the allegation of unlawful or forceful conversion from one religion to the other. 

The appellant, Rev. Stainislaus, raised his main objection when the case was heard by Magistrate, First-Class, Baloda-Bazar, claiming that the State Legislature lacked the necessary legislative authority and only the Parliament had the authority to make laws and not the state legislature. He also contended that the Madhya Pradesh Act violated the Constitution because it did not fall under the authority of Entry I of List II and List III of the Seventh Schedule. It was also further raised that Sections 3, 4, and 5(2) were in violation of Article 25 of the Constitution and hence were void. The Magistrate did not refer the matter to the High Court with the view that the objections raised had no force in them. The same view was held by the Additional Session Judge when asked for the revision of the order. Hence, the appellant moved to the High Court and filed petitions.

Therfeore, the case mainly dealt with the validity of Madhya Pradesh Dharma Swatantraya Adhiniyam,1968 and Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967, challenged in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh and the High Court of Orissa respectively [12].

• Evangelical Fellowship of India and Act Now for Harmony and Democracy V. State of Himachal Pradesh.

The Court held that the right to ‘propagate’ one’s religion does not include the right to convert others. The Court also ruled that the provisions of the Himachal Pradesh Act and Rules do not violate the right to freedom of religion guaranteed by the Constitution.[13]

• Chirag Singhvi V. State of Rajasthan & Anr, Decided on 15th December 2017.

 It is true that under Article 25 of the Constitution of India there is fundamental right granted to every (27 of 38) [HC-149/2017] citizen to profess, practise and propagate his religion freely, but it does not mean that a citizen of particular religion can forcibly compel other citizen to change his/her religion so as to solemnize the marriage only because after conversion of religion, a citizen bears his/her all rights which is available in the converted religion and to relinquish his/her right of the parent religion. Therefore, obviously, no person can be compelled to change religion only to solemnize marriage, therefore conversion of religion only for the purpose of solemnizing forcible marriage, is not permissible under the fundamental right as enshrined under Article 25 of the Constitution of India. In the Sura-II Ayat 221 of Holy Quran a person of Muslim religion should have faith in Islam religion for all purpose not only for marriage.[14]

STATE’S ROLE IN INTER-RELIGIOUS MARRIAGES:[15]

Inter-religious marriage is not a personal issue that is dealt privately by families in their homes. Since it involves the law (central and state), runaway couples and FIRs, it is a public issue which warrants the involvement of the State as well.

To understand how inter religious marriages play out in the society and what kind of role the State plays in these inter-religious marriages we will be looking at it through 3 perspectives -:

• Role of the Police :

The first point of state contact in case of a runaway inter-religious couple is when an FIR is registered. This is usually done by the male guardian of the girl, and is registered as a case of abduction, kidnapping and often rape by the boy.

The police begin their search of the couple, and if caught, the boy is taken into custody for questioning and can possibly even be imprisoned.

On the other hand, the girl having been returned to her home is pressurized by her family into testifying against the boy to make a case for abduction and kidnapping[16].

The police sometimes even colludes with the family members of the couple to stop the inter religious marriages. They contribute to the patriarchal idea of controlling females and exploiting the ambiguities in the legal system to turn a runaway couple case into an abduction one[17]. Even though they might know the reality of the situation and how the couple has run away on its own will to get married, they go ahead with the false story of the boy kidnapping /abducting the girl and make out a case against him.

• Role of the Judiciary:

The judiciary plays a significant role in addressing issues related to inter-religious marriages, particularly in cases where marriages have been solemnized or when couples face obstacles before marriage. In the former scenario, the court evaluates the validity of the marriage, while in the latter, it often deals with abduction or kidnapping allegations against one party.

Frequently, if a couple elopes, the girl’s family may accuse the boy of coercion, leading to abduction or kidnapping charges. Despite courts recognizing fabricated claims in some instances, legal constraints often prevent intervention unless the girl, if a major, provides a favourable statement.

In a landmark 2006 ruling[18], the court affirmed the right of individuals to marry of their own choice and deemed violence against inter-religious couples illegal, signalling a significant step toward protecting their rights. However, recent cases, such as a Hindu girl’s conversion to Islam to marry a Muslim man, highlight ongoing challenges. Despite her voluntary testimony in the Kerala High Court, the marriage was annulled, suggesting judicial endorsement of paternal authority over the girl’s decisions, reflecting concerns of “love jihad”.

However, the Supreme Court’s intervention emphasized the girl’s autonomy and upheld her constitutional right to choose her partner, emphasizing that parental concerns cannot override an adult’s choice to marry. Subsequent rulings have reiterated the judiciary’s stance in respecting couples’ decisions, cautioning against mala fide proceedings by parents unless there is substantive evidence of coercion. This underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding individuals’ right to marry freely and protecting inter-religious couples.

• Role of the legislature:

The legislature, governed by the State List, holds authority to enact laws concerning law and order issues. Many states have enacted anti-conversion laws to prevent fraudulent or coerced conversions. However, concerns arise when these laws prohibit conversion for marriage, even if done voluntarily. Examining examples from Uttar Pradesh and Karnataka illustrates this issue.

In 2020, Uttar Pradesh implemented the Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Ordinance[19], requiring interfaith couples to inform the district magistrate two months before marriage. This ordinance imposes governmental scrutiny on voluntary conversions for marriage, fostering a hostile environment for inter-religious couples.

Similarly, Karnataka passed the Anti-Conversion Bill in September 2022, prohibiting conversion through misrepresentation, force, coercion, or marriage without prior notice to the district magistrate.

These laws provide an avenue for parents to file false cases against their daughters’ partners, leveraging accusations of allurement or fraudulent means. Previously limited to kidnapping charges, now parents can exploit these laws to justify arrests, posing challenges for inter-religious couples seeking marriage.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS ON “A CHRISTIAN MARRYING A HINDU IN GURUDWARA!”

What’s the News, Why in News?

A recent petition filed under Section 27 of the Special Marriage Act before the Family Court, Patiala House, New Delhi, has brought to light a perplexing issue regarding the validity of marriages celebrated in alternative forms and later registered under Section 15 of the Special Marriage Act.

The case involved a Christian and a Hindu couple who married in an Anand Karaj ceremony at Gurudwara and subsequently registered their marriage under the Special Marriage Act. However, when their marriage deteriorated and they sought divorce under the Special Marriage Act, questions arose about the legitimacy of their union. This case underscores the ambiguity surrounding such marriages and the pressing need for clarity in legal interpretation[20].

Legal Framework in Place:

The Special Marriage Act, 1954 provides a comprehensive legal framework for both solemnizing and registering marriages, catering to couples of diverse religious backgrounds.

Chapter 2 of the Act deals with the solemnization of special marriages, outlining conditions and procedures for marriage between consenting adults.

Chapter 3 pertains specifically to the registration of marriages celebrated in other forms, allowing couples to register their unions under the Special Marriage Act, provided certain conditions are met.

Section 15 of the Special Marriage Act enables the registration of marriages solemnized through alternative ceremonies, thereby extending legal recognition to unions celebrated outside traditional norms.

CASE LAWS: The Karnataka High Court’s interpretation in Rency Mathew v. Bharath Kumar[21] introduced a paradox within the statute by deeming marriages celebrated in alternative forms invalid for registration under Section 15 of the Special Marriage Act.

The court contended that only marriages recognized as valid under personal laws could be registered under the Special Marriage Act, thereby rendering Chapter 3 redundant. This interpretation contradicts the legislative intent of providing legal validity to marriages celebrated through diverse customs and traditions, raising concerns about its impact on matrimonial laws and the rights of couples.

The interpretation laid down by the Karnataka High Court creates confusion and undermines the purpose of Chapter 3 of the Special Marriage Act. By requiring marriages to be valid under personal laws for registration under the Special Marriage Act, the court overlooks the intent of providing legal recognition to unions celebrated outside traditional norms.

This approach not only restricts the rights of couples but also perpetuates legal uncertainty and inconsistency within the system. Moreover, it raises questions about the practical implications of such an interpretation on matrimonial proceedings and the broader legal landscape.

 AFTERMATH:

In cases where couples seek divorce under the Special Marriage Act, the interpretation laid down by the Karnataka High Court could have far-reaching consequences. While mutually consenting parties may find relief in annulment, contested divorces could lead to unjust outcomes, depriving one party of legal redress. The lack of clarity in the law exacerbates the vulnerability of couples and undermines the principle of equality before the law. Moreover, it highlights the urgent need for legislative intervention and judicial clarity to address the inconsistencies within the Special Marriage Act and ensure equitable outcomes for all parties involved in matrimonial disputes.

CONCLUSION:

Despite legal provisions allowing individuals to freely choose their spouses, inter-religious marriages in India continue to face significant hurdles. Whether couples opt for marriage under the Special Marriage Act (SMA) or choose conversion, they encounter various challenges and barriers.

Marriage under the SMA involves navigating through bureaucratic processes, including notice periods, objections, and time constraints, which can be cumbersome and time-consuming. Conversely, opting for conversion to marry under personal laws often exposes couples to accusations of coercion or undue influence, particularly from their families. With the tightening of anti-conversion laws in certain states, the process becomes even more daunting for interfaith couples.

While the judiciary has consistently upheld the rights of inter-religious couples to marry, there is a pressing need for legislative reforms to facilitate such unions. Amendments to the SMA could streamline the process for interfaith couples, reducing their reliance on conversion. Additionally, state laws should refrain from creating unnecessary hurdles for voluntary conversions for marriage purposes.

While anti-conversion laws were initially intended to prevent forced conversions, they should not impede voluntary conversions for marriage. Individuals should have the autonomy to make such decisions without undue interference from the government or external parties. Enhancing legal safeguards and promoting inclusivity are essential steps towards creating a more equitable environment for inter-religious couples in India.

 

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Chiraag K A

References:

[1] Pothen, “Inter-Religious Marriages in Central India (Malwa).”

[2] Special Marriage Act (SMA) 1954 (India) 

[3] “Gandharva Vivaha in Ancient Hinduism – Love Marriage in Hindu Religion | Hindu Blog”.

[4] Dhanda, “Runaway Marriages.”

[5] The Constitution of India – Article 14, 15, 21.

[6] AIR 2006 SC 2522; (2006) 5 SCC 475; 2006 (56) ACC 234

[7] https://lexpeeps.in/lata-singh-v-state-of-uttar-pradesh-anr/

[8] SMA, n 4 S.6(2) 

[9] SMA, n 4 S.7(2) 

[10] “Tightening the Noose on Interfaith Marriage.” 

[11] 1977 AIR 908 1977 SCR (2) 611 1977 SCC (1) 677

[12]  https://legalvidhiya.com/rev-stainislaus-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-others/

[13] (CWP No. 438 of 2011).  https://www.minormatters.org/storage/app/uploads/public/5b5/5a5/7bc/5b55a57bcc5bd294686352.pdf

[14] (D.B. Habeas Corpus No. 149 / 2017) https://indiankanoon.org/doc/177909177/#:~:text=It%20is%20true%20that%20under,his%2Fher%20religion%20so%20as

[15] Bhumi Sharma – Inter-religious marriages in India – still an obstacle?

[16] Chowdhry, “Private Lives, State Intervention.”

[17] Dhanda, “Runaway Marriages.” 

[18] Lata Singh vs State Of U.P. & Another 2006 

[19] EPW Engage, “Anti-Conversion Laws” 

[20] Also Refer https://www.livelaw.in/articles/christian-hindu-gurudwara-legal-catch-22-marriage-laws-254263

[21] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/170003227/ & https://www.the-laws.com/Encyclopedia/Browse/Case?CaseId=010202978100&Title=RENCY-MATHEW-Vs.-BHARATH-KUMAR