“Writ Petition Dismissed Due to ‘Non-Compliance with Legislative Requirements for Religious Conversion’ in Inter-Religious Marriage Case”

Allahabad, August 29, 2023 — The Allahabad High Court, in a landmark decision today, dismissed a writ petition seeking protection from family interference in an inter-religious marriage and live-in relationship. The Hon’ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, J., cited “non-compliance with legislative requirements for religious conversion” as per the U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, as the primary reason for dismissal.

In the case titled Smt. Shraddha @ Jannat And Another vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others, the petitioners had approached the court for protection from interference by their family members, particularly respondent no. 6, who is the father of petitioner no. 1. The court acknowledged that both parties had reached the age of majority and are legally eligible for marriage. However, the court expressed reservations due to the lack of compliance with Sections 8 and 9 of the U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021.

“Legal requirements for religious conversion under Section 8 and 9 of Act not complied with by petitioners,” the judgement stated. It also noted that the petitioners are distant cousins belonging to different religious communities, hence the question of re-conversion was not applicable here.

The court suggested that it’s “open to the petitioners to approach the District Magistrate for compliance of Section 8 and 9 of the U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 and seek necessary order under the Act.”

Though the writ petition was dismissed, the court has left the door open for the petitioners to take necessary legal steps as per the Act for future relief.

No specific past cases were cited in the judgement, making it a noteworthy standalone decision in the evolving legal landscape surrounding inter-religious marriages and conversions.

Date of Decision: 29^th August 2023

Smt. Shraddha @ Jannat And Another vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others