Skip to main content

A VIEW ON INTERFAITH MARRIAGE LAW

               A VIEW ON INTERFAITH MARRIAGE LAW 

Several state governments had shown concerns about enacting proper laws to stop marriages which they refer to as ‘Love Jihad’.

However, contemplating laws over interfaith marriage directly violates several rights of people such as right to freedom, personal liberty and right to life.


INTERFAITH MARRIAGES

The matrimonial relationship developed between two individuals having different religious faiths. Although marrying into a different religion is a matter of choice of an adult, there are certain issues regarding the same.

ISSUES WITH INTERFAITH MARRIAGES

Interfaith marriages are believed to be a forced conversion of one of the spouses (mostly women).As per the Muslim Personal law, in order to get married to a non-Muslim, conversion of religion is the only way.Hindu religion allows only monogamy and those who want to marry second time take another course.There is no provision regarding caste determination of children born out of such marriages.The Special Marriage Act, 1954 is not compatible with backwardness of the society.

There is debate over the validity of Article 226 in context of annulling the interfaith marriage by high court.

THE SPECIAL MARRIAGE ACT

  1. The Special Marriage Act is a special law enacted to provide for a unique form of marriage by registration wherein the parties to the marriage do not have to renounce their religion.

  2. This Act includes Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Jains, and Buddhists marriages.This act applies to all Indian states, except Jammu & Kashmir.This Act applies not only to Indian citizens who belong to different castes and religions but also to Indian nationals who live abroad.

REQUIREMENTS

  1. The fundamental requirement under this Act for a valid marriage is the consent of both parties to the marriage.

  2. If both parties to the marriage are willing to marry each other, that’s enough; caste, religion, race, etc. is not a restriction.

          CONDITIONS FOR MARRIAGE

  1. The bridegroom must be at least 21, and at the time of the marriage, the bride must be at least 18 years of age. This is the minimum age limit respectively for a boy/girl to marry.

  2. At the time of their marriage, both parties must be monogamous; i.e., they must be unmarried and at that time should not have any living spouse.

  3. In order to be able to decide for themselves, the parties should be mentally fit, i.e., they must be sane at the time of marriage.

CHALLENGES WITH CONTEMPLATING LAWS FOR INTERFAITH MARRIAGE

Contemplating laws to regulate matrimonial relationships between two consenting adults would not be just against the constitutional guarantees but would offend the very notion of individuality and basic freedoms.

Interference of the law in an individual’s choice of marriage violates the existing constitutional rights such as the Right to Equality, Right to Freedom & Personal Liberty, Freedom of Religion and Right to Life.

Also as enshrined under Indian Constitution:

Article 21: It declares that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law. This right is available to both citizens and non-citizens.

Article 25 of the Indian constitution provides the freedom to practice any religion of one’s choice and personal laws of the religions have specified various laws relating to marriage for the followers of that religion. Hence, in India inter-faith marriages are allowed as the constitution allows one to convert to a different religion from what one was born with and further the personal laws of the religion have provisions.


CONCLUSION

In order to avoid inclusion of any further laws, there should be acceptance of the special marriage act, 1954 at the mental and social level.The rights should not be exploited; conversion of religion for marriage only is not at all wise.

The marriage of two adults is a complete matter of their own choice, neither a law is to impose any decision, nor any individual. The freedom of decision of his/ her marriage shall lie with the person only. 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more