NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday he refused to admit a petition to challenge the Allahabad High Court order which had held that “conversion solely for the purpose of marriage is unacceptable.”
The superior court said the division bench The Superior Court has subsequently disapproved and annulled the challenged order.
A court of Chief Justice SA Bobde and Justices AS Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian said they see no reason to interfere, as the petitioner has accepted that the Allahabad High Court Division Court subsequently annulled the order dated 23 April. September.
At first, the bank asked defense petitioner Aldanish Rein For this reason, he cannot go to the Superior Court on the matter, since his petition under article 32 of the Constitution is not the appropriate remedy to annul the Superior Court order.
Rein argued that the Superior Court can say that the statement made by the Superior Court is not correct.
The court told Rein that there is no need to work on something like this and that for any substantial relief the Superior Court could be contacted.
“If the High Court doesn’t give you relief, then you can come here,” the court said, adding that the Article 32 petition is missing from this case. Rein claimed that the Superior Court order caused the Uttar Government of Pradesh to pass an ordinance and hundreds of interreligious couples they are being harassed every day because of this.
The bank said, “You are ruining your own case by pressing at a point that is not sustainable. You are pressing this unnecessarily.”
When asked about the order of the divisional court, the lawyer replied “Yes, the division court of the Superior Court has said that this statement is not correct.”
The bench said: “Once the division bench has held that this statement is bad, why do you want the Supreme Court to declare the same?”
In his plea, Rein said: “Being concerned about the freedom to practice any religion and the freedom to choose one Life partner and, furthermore, concerned about the erroneous precedent established by the Superior Court of the Allahabad Judiciary in the present petitioner, he addresses this Court as an official of this Court through the present Public interest litigation“.
The lawyer said the High Court order has not only left the poor couple at the mercy of the offending relatives, police, vigilantes and religious associations of those who promote hatred, but has also set a wrong precedent that Interreligious marriages cannot. be solemnized in the case of conversion of religion by any of the partners.
“That undoubtedly interfaith couples should adopt the Special Marriage Act of 1954 to enter into marriage, but the cumbersome process and unreasonable provisions of the Special Marriage Act of 1954 make it very difficult for a runaway couple to comply with such provisions, which results in religious marriages after the conversion to the faith of either member of the couple, “the plea read.
Rein alleged that the petitioner has seen inter-religious marriages under the Special Marriage Law in his family and is therefore aware of the difficulties that an inter-religious couple must face in entering into marriage.
“That practically the Special Law on Marriages is only intended for couples in which both families agree to those marriages or at least are not there to harm the couple,” said the statement.
He said that “the choice of religion is a personal choice of a person. If the Court does not allow a person to freely choose their religion, it amounts to a violation of their fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution of India.”
The plea was to declare that the observations made by the High Court are incorrect in view of the freedom of religion and the freedom to choose a living partner guaranteed by the principles of the Constitution of India.
.
