Ahmedabad: Chairman of Judge Vikram Nath and Justice Biren Vaishnav argued that according to the amendment June 2021 in the Gujarat religious freedom law, Interfaith Marriage followed by conversion will be a violation and will attract criminal provisions.
“Prima Facie with the Plain Reading Part 3 of the 2003 Law, we feel that the inter-faith marriage is followed by repentance will achieve violations based on the 2003 Law.
The marriage itself and consequential conversion are considered conversions that violate the laws that attract criminal provisions” .
The judges observed that from the perception of ordinary people, only because the conversion occurred due to marriage, “it was not able to be considered a conversion that violated the law or marriage carried out for the purpose of conversion that violated the law”.
In the shift of the burden of proof on charges to determine that the conversion of marriage and then it has not occurred because of all fraud, loan or coercion, the court said, “This again places the parties legally entering the interfaith marriage in danger.” Further recorded, ” The wedding of the Prima Facie interface between two adults who agreed to the operation of the provisions of Part 3 of the 2003 Law Disturbing the intricacies of marriage, including individual choice rights, thus violating Article 21 of the Constitution.
” In the temporary order, HC remained provisions in response to two petitions submitted by Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind and an activist, Mujahid Nafees from the Minority Coordination Committee.
Their lawyers caused various problems and emphasized that the change in anti-conversion law seized his right to choose a partner to get married.
This is a direct attack on privacy rights.
In addition, it makes a law aimed at holding someone to embrace other religions with marriage also violates the provisions of Article 25 of the Constitution.
The state government states that the law will apply only when elements of the style, loan or fraud method are found in conversion.
The court asked for several occasions whether the law was aimed at prohibiting interfaith marriages.