Should Recent Conversion To Another Faith Cast Doubts Against An Otherwise Valid Marriage?
Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack
View all posts by this Author
By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2020-10-31 18:20:29
About the Author
Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack
View all posts by this Author
The Allahabad High Court has disallowed the plea of an interfaith couple in which the Hindu girl had converted to Islam just a month before solemnizing the marriage. Citing an earlier judgment of the same court, the judges were of the view that "conversion just for marriage is unacceptable". The girl had petitioned the court to direct the police and her parents not to interfere in her married life but the court dismissed the petition.
There are two things to be considered here. If two consenting adults of marriageable age (who also fulfill all other conditions of a valid marriage in the Special Marriages Act, 1954(S M Act)) willingly solemnize a marriage, shouldn't the marriage stand regardless of any other circumstance? It could be that the couple was in love for some time and the boy's family wanted the girl to convert to their faith. If their love was strong and if the girl had willingly converted to Islam for life in order to marry the boy, should the police and the family interfere in their married life and should the court not direct them to stop such interference?
Of course it is possible for two persons of different faiths to marry each other without giving up their religion (and the S M Act was enacted to protect the rights of such persons), but at times it is not possible to keep separate religious identities. While not condoning the fact, one needs to state that it is the girl who is mostly made to convert on the specious plea that she would not be able to adjust in the new household if she does not convert to the religion professed by the boy's family. Although things are changing and many couples keep adhering to their own religion in the same household, different kinds of pressure make life difficult for them.
The second thing is what would have been the court's stand if the girl had not converted and had still married the Muslim boy and if the police and her parents had still hounded them? Obviously, the court would have directed the police to leave them alone as they were consenting adults of marriageable age who had willingly solemnized the marriage. Then how does the fact that the girl converted just one month before marriage change the equation? Obviously if the girl was willing to convert to Islam in order to marry the boy, she would do it one month before the marriage as a month's notice has to be given under the S M Act. Also, if she had converted say, six months before the marriage, her parents would not have allowed that. Converting just a month before to fulfill the legal requirement of the notice period was the best option for her.
The court should have considered the girl's plea and should have let the couple lead a happy married life. The fact of not accepting conversion just for marriage should come into play when devious motives (like a Hindu man converting to Islam in order to marry a second time while not divorced from his first wife) are involved. For people genuinely in love and willing to spend a lifetime together, the only requirement should be that the conversion should not have been made by force.
