The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court while disposing the petition observed that Section 3(1) of the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 prohibits live-in relationships like a matrimonial bond between couples of different religions.
The Division Bench of Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Narendra Kumar Johari passed this order while hearing a petition filed by Shilpa Alias Shikha and Another.
By means of the petition, the petitioners have sought quashing of F.I.R dated 18.03.2024 bearing Case Crime/FIR for the offence under Sections 363 & 366 P.C, at Police Station Tarun, District Ayodhya.
On April 04, the Court passed the following order:
“Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that an FIR against the petitioner No 2 has been lodged with false and exaggerated contention. In fact, the petitioners have been friends since long back. When petitioner No 1(girl) expressed her willingness to marry with petitioner No 2(interfaith partner), her family members extended the threat of life therefore she left her home and started living with petitioner No 2 by her free will and accord. Both the petitioners are major. The date of birth of petitioner No 1 is shown in her High School Certificate as 15.10.2005 and the date of birth of petitioner No 2 is shown as 01.02.1996. At present, they are residing with each other in live-in relationship, which is permissible by law, therefore, the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.
AGA opposed the submission of counsel for the petitioners and submitted that both the petitioners belong to the different religion. They have not applied for conversion of their religion according to Section 8 & 9 of the U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, therefore, being in relationship against the provisions of law, FIR cannot be quashed.
The Court heard the counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Section 3 of the aforesaid Act read as under:
3. Prohibition of conversion from one religion to another religion by misrepresentation, force, fraud, undue influence, coercion, allurement- (1) No person shall convert or attempt to convert, either directly or otherwise, any other person from one religion to another by use or practice of misrepresentation, force, undue influence, coercion, allurement or by any fraudulent means. No person shall abet, convince or conspire such conversion. Explanation- For the purposes of this subsection conversion by solemnization of marriage or relationship in the nature of marriage on account of factors enumerated in this Subsection shall be deemed inclined.
Earlier, the concept of live-in relationship was alien to society. Usually in live-in relationships both the parties live like a married person but not actually married. The process of marriage is pious which creates legal rights of parties and their offspring, which are governed by the provisions of law, whereas, the consequences of live-in relationship are different. The U.P Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 came into force on 27.11.2020. The date of occurrence when the petitioner No1 fled away from her home has been shown as 18.03.2024. Admittedly, both the petitioners belong to different religions and they have not solemnized their marriage in accordance to law rather they are residing in a live-in relationship.
Section 3(1) of aforesaid Act, 2021 prohibits such living relationship which is in the nature of matrimonial bond. The punishment for contravention of provisions of aforesaid Section 3 has been provided under Section 5 of the aforesaid Act, hence, such residing of petitioners in relationship like marriage cannot get approval by the Court of law. No specific occurrence or act has been mentioned in the petition prejudicially to their life and living.
In view of the above, the FIR in question cannot be quashed, unless they solemnized their marriage in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. However, if the petitioners feel any threat of life or any act which constitutes offence, they are at liberty to move the application under Section 154(1) or Section 154(3) or Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C or file a complaint under Section 200 CrPC.”
The Court noted that,
After the aforesaid order was passed while petitioner No1 was leaving the premises of Court, commotion and an untoward incident of snatching a document took place and she found threatening to her person, therefore, she again came to the Court.
Counsel for the petitioners, thereafter, has moved an application, which is taken on record and in which petitioner No 1 states that she apprehends harm from her family member therefore she is desirous of going to Nari Niketan and further prays for appropriate order with regard to her security.
In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case since petitioner No 1 is major and she has expressed her willingness and desire to go to Women Protection Home, Prayag Narayan Road, Lucknow till solemnization of her marriage in accordance with law, the Court observed.
The Court directed the A.G.A to ensure her safe admission in Women Protection Home. A lady police personnel shall also accompany the petitioner No 1 to Women Protection Home, Prayag Narayan Road, Lucknow.
With the aforesaid observation/direction, the Court disposed of the application.