Consent of family, community, State not necessary if two adults agree to marry: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High court has held that a marriage registrar does not have the power to withhold registration merely for the reason that the parties have not obtained the necessary approval for conversion from district authorities (Mayra Alias Vaishnvi Vilas Shirshikar And Anr vs State of UP and Ors.). .Pertinently, the Court said that "consent of family, community or State is not necessary if two adult individuals agree to enter into a wedlock."While affirming the right to choose a partner, Justice Suneet Kumar held that a marriage registrar cannot refuse registration of marriage merely on allegations by an aggrieved person."[Whether] the validity of the marriage is void or voidable cannot be gone into by the Marriage Registrar/Officer. The authority, be it the Marriage Registrar/Officer, or the district authority under the unlawful Conversion Act, 2021, is neither a court nor authorized by law to enter into the issue pertaining to the validity of marriage or prohibit inter faith marriage," the Court said..The Court was hearing a batch of petitions moved by married inter-faith couples involving conversion, with the petitioners pleading that the conversion was out of free will. All the petitioners apprehended threat to their life, liberty and well-being. In the leading writ petition, it was submitted that both the petitioners were medical professionals, one was Vaishnavi, a Hindu, who after conversion accepted Islam and she married the second petitioner according to Islamic customs. .The following reliefs were granted to all the petitioners by the court: 1. The State government and private respondents were restrained from interfering with the life, liberty and privacy of the petitioners to live as man and woman; 2. The police authorities of the respective districts were directed to ensure the safety of the petitioners and provide protection to them, if demanded or needed.3. The marriage registrar/ officer of respective districts were directed to forthwith register the marriage of the petitioners, without, insisting/awaiting approval of the competent district authority with regard to conversion of faith..With regard to right to choose a partner, the judge held that the duty of the court is to uphold the same and not to abridge the sphere of the right unless there is a valid authority of law. "The choice of a partner, whether within or outside marriage, lies within the exclusive domain of each individual. Intimacies of marriage lie within a core zone of privacy, which is inviolable. The absolute right of an individual to choose a life partner is not in the least affected by matters of faith."."The absolute right of an individual to choose a life partner is not in the least affected by matters of faith."Allahabad High Court .The government counsel submitted that the petitioners are not entitled to any relief and they should approach a competent district authority and obtain approval, in the first instance, with regard to their conversion.The counsel for the petitioner rebutted this by arguing that prior approval of the district authority followed by registration of marriage is not an essential condition for conversion and marriage. Even if the approval of the authority was not taken prior to conversion, the petitioners still have a right to live together since they have attained majority, it was contended.It was further submitted by the counsel for petitioners that the Uttar Pradesh enactment on interfaith conversion proposes to criminalise conversions for the purpose of marriage, which among other things violates the fundamental right to privacy guaranteed by Article 21. .With regard to Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, the Court held that interfaith marriages are not prohibited under the Act, but the law can be misused to subject parties entering into interfaith marriage to harassment."The Unlawful Conversion Act, 2021, per se, does not prohibit interfaith marriage. The Marriage Registrar/Officer, however, lacks the power to withhold the registration of marriage, merely for the reason that the parties have not obtained the necessary approval of conversion from the district authority. Such approval is a directory and not mandatory. If interpreted otherwise the Act would not satisfy the test of reasonableness and fairness, and would fail to pass the muster of Article 14 and Article 21," the court held.All the petitions were allowed and the State government was directed to issue appropriate Government Order to the marriage registrars/ officers and district authorities, to comply with and implement the order..[Read order]