Read Time: 04 minutes
Court emphasized that both individuals involved in the relationship were adults, highlighting that the girl explicitly stated that she had willingly left her home with her partner
The Allahabad High Court recently quashed a case involving an interfaith marriage. An FIR had been filed against the couple under Sections 379, 120-B, 366 of the IPC & Section 3/5 (1) of the U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021.
The bench of Justices Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Gajendra Kumar noted that when the girl was produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, she recorded in her statement under Section 164 CrPC that the version of the first information report was concocted and false. She submitted that she had married the man of her own will and till date, both parties had not changed their religion. She also stated that she wanted to reside along with her husband.
The division bench emphasized that both parties in the relationship were adults. Therefore, it held, "Once the age of the victim girl is not in dispute, the offence as alleged against the petitioners is not made out as victim had left her home in order to live with the petitioner no.2".
However, the court clarified that the plea before it, filed by the couple to quash the FIR and seek protection, didn't concern the validity of their marriage. Instead, it focused on the fundamental rights of two individuals—their freedom to choose a partner and their right to liberty in deciding whom they wish to live with.
The high court referred to several judgments of the high court and the Supreme Court on the issue and opined in favour of the couple.
"we are of the considered opinion that both the petitioners are major and the petitioner no.1 has come up with the categorical stand that she had left her home with the petitioner no.2 willingly and is living with him as wife and the marriage has also been solemnized under the Special Marriage Act on 08.08.2022, which is not disputed. She has also categorically stated in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that both the petitioners have not changed their respective religion," the bench said.
Case Title: Deepanshi And Another v. State Of Up And 2 Others
Please Login or Register
