‘Absolute Violence’: Madras High Court Upholds Divorce Over Religious Coercion

Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

Court noted that despite remaining Hindu, the woman's husband persistently pressured her to convert to Islam, even changing her name

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court recently upheld the dissolution of a marriage, asserting that coercing a spouse to convert religion amounts to cruelty.

The division bench comprising Justice N. Seshasayee and Justice L. Victoria Gowri said, "Not only conversion, but also effort to proselytize a spouse to the religion of another without their consent is nothing, but absolute violence".

Court dismissed a civil miscellaneous appeal filed by a Muslim man contesting the Family Court’s decision to grant divorce to his Hindu wife.

The case arose from a petition filed by the wife, Devi, who alleged that her husband, Syed Saleem Batcha, subjected her to physical and emotional abuse while also pressuring her to convert to Islam. The couple had married under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, in 1992, allowing them to retain their respective religions. However, Devi claimed that post-marriage, her husband not only forced her to change her faith but also attempted to alter her cultural identity by insisting she replace her 'thali' (a sacred Hindu matrimonial symbol).

The Family Court in Tiruchirappalli had granted her divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion, a decision that was challenged by the husband. However, the High Court, after evaluating the evidence, found no merit in his appeal.

The bench relied on key documents, including a letter from the husband admitting to his marital separation and a consent deed where he acknowledged his willingness for divorce. Court observed that the appellant had withdrawn from the marital relationship and was residing separately, reinforcing the wife’s claim of desertion.

Highlighting the fundamental right to freedom of conscience under Article 25 of the Constitution, the judges stated that compelling a spouse to convert against their will amounts to a violation of personal liberty under Article 21. The bench further remarked that “forcible conversion means violence” and categorized persistent pressure to change one’s religion as a severe form of mental cruelty.

The bench also took note of the social and emotional struggles faced by women in interfaith marriages, particularly when their autonomy is undermined. It underscored that marriage should be built on mutual respect, and any attempt to enforce religious conformity within such unions disrupts the foundation of personal choice and dignity.

Case Title: Syed Saleem Batcha Vs. Devi