Moral policing can't be allowed when 2 adults stay together by way of marriage or live-in-relationship: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently held that moral policing cannot be allowed in matters where two major adults have willingly decided to live together whether by way of marriage or in a live-in relationship [Guljar Khan v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others]..Single-Judge Justice Nandita Dubey said the Constitution gives a right to every citizen of this country, who has attained majority, to live her or his life as per her or his own wishes."No moral policing can be allowed in such matters where the two major persons are willing to stay together whether by way of marriage or in a live-in relationship, when the party to that arrangement is doing it willingly and not forced into it,” the Court observed.Since in the instant case, the woman who had attained 18 years of age, expressed her willingness to live with her husband, the Court turned down the argument of the State that the marriage was in violation of Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion (MPFR) Act 2021 and the woman should, therefore, be sent to Nari Niketan. The Court was adjudicating a Habeas Corpus petition moved by one Guljar Khan, praying the Court to order the release of his wife, who has been forcibly taken to Banaras by her parents and was illegally detained there.It was the case of the petitioner-husband that he had married his wife with her consent after she had willingly converted to Islam..The 19-year-old wife appearing via video conference stated before the Court that she had willingly married the petitioner and was never forced into conversion and whatever she has done was as per her own wishes.Moreover, she informed the Court that her parents and her grandparents have forcibly taken her to Banaras where she was beaten up and threatened constantly to give statement against her husband (petitioner). She prayed before the Court that she wants to go with her husband as she willingly married him..However, Government Advocate Priyanka Mishra opposed the plea, arguing that since the petitioner and the woman had performed the marriage in contravention of Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion (MPFR) Act 2021, their marriage shall be deemed to be null and void. She contended that since Section 3 of the MPFR Act provides that no person shall convert for the purpose of marriage and any conversion in contravention of this provision shall be deemed null and void, therefore, the marriage of the petitioner should be declared null and void..After considering the facts and submission of the parties in the instant case, the Court rejected the arguments raised by the respondents noting that both the petitioner and his wife are major and the age of woman was not disputed by any of the parties. “The corpus is major person. Her age is not disputed by any of the parties. The Constitution gives a right to every major citizen of this country to live her or his life as per her or his own wishes. Under the circumstances, the objection raised by the counsel for the State and her prayer to send the corpus to Nari Niketan is rejected.”The Court, therefore, directed the concerned authorities to handover the wife to the petitioner and to see that the petitioner-husband and the wife reach their house safely. The Court further directed the police authorities to ensure the two are not threatened by the parents of the wife..Advocate SK Raghuwanshi appeared for the petitioner..[Read Order]