In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court on Monday held that the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 neither prohibits interfaith marriages nor bars such couples from living together in a live-in relationship [Noori And Another v State of UP and 4 Others]

Justice Vivek Kumar Singh observed that courts do not see such couples as Hindu and Muslim, rather as two grown up individuals who out of their own free will and choice are living together peacefully and happily for a considerable time.

"Right to live with a person of his/her choice, irrespective of religion professed by them, is intrinsic to right to life and personal liberty. Interference in a personal relationship, would constitute a serious encroachment into the right to freedom of choice of the two individuals. This Court fails to understand that if the law permits two persons even of the same sex to live together peacefully then neither any individual nor a family nor even State can have objection to hetrosexual relationship of two major individuals who out of their own free will are living together," the Bench said.

The Bench added that the courts in various decisions have held that live-in relation is neither prohibited nor punishable under any law.

"Therefore, considering Article 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution of India and the Act, 2021, it cannot be said that live-in relationship of interfaith couple is an offence," the Bench said.

The Court explained that for attracting the provisions of anti-conversion law, conversion from one religion to another religion is necessary and that conversion should be by practice of misrepresentation, force, undue influence, coercion or allurement or by any fraudulent means or by marriage or by relationship in the nature of marriage. 

"Even the interfaith marriage, per se, is not prohibited under the Act, 2021. Provision has also been made under the Act, 2021, and according to which, if a person wishes to change/convert his or her religion, he/she is expected to follow the procedure prescribed under Section 8 & 9 of the Act, 2021. But one cannot be forced to convert his or her religion for the purposes of marriage or for living together in a live-in relationship," the Bench said.

The Court was dealing with a batch of 12 petitions, wherein seven Muslim women were residing with Hindu men and five Hindu women were residing with Muslim men.

The couples had approached the Court for police protection, alleging that they were facing threats from third parties including their family members.

The Court observed that the right to human life is to be treated on a much higher pedestal, regardless of a citizen's religious belief. 

“The mere fact that the petitioners are living in an interfaith relationship, would not deprive them of their fundamental right as envisaged in Constitution of India, being citizens of India. No discrimination can be made on the basis of caste, creed, sex or religion,” the Bench said.

It added that any interference with their choice would be a threat of the concept of unity in diversity.

“To disregard the choice of a person who is of the age of majority would not only be antithetic to the freedom of choice of a grown up individual but would also be a threat to the concept of unity in diversity”.

Earlier, Uttar Pradesh government argued that the live-in couples were required to comply with the provisions of anti-conversion law.

It was even submitted that a Muslim cannot reside in a live-in relationship prior to his or her marriage

"One cannot freely move with another except in accordance with the procedure prescribed in Section 8 and 9 of the Act, 2021, or by marriage under the Special Marriage Act," the State said.

However, amicus curiae Shwetashwa Agarwal argued that the couples were only living in a relationship and as such, compliance of the provisions was not necessary.

"If a person intends to convert his/her religion, only then he/she will give a declaration in terms of Section 8 and 9 of the Act, 2021," Agarwal said.

Considering the submissions and legal precedents, the Court noted that none of the petitioners before it had claimed that any attempt was made by their partner for conversion of their religion.

"It is only claimed by the petitioners that they are living together in a live-in relationship and following their religion. Section 4 of the Act, 2021, gives power to any person to lodge F.I.R./complaint relating to the contravention of the provisions of the Act, 2021. In these cases, no F.I.R. or complaint has been lodged against any person that religion of one petitioner was converted or attempted to be converted. Therefore, it cannot be said under the facts and circumstances of these cases that any act in contravention of the provision of the Act, 2021, was made by the petitioners and a punishable offence was done by them," the Bench said.

The Court emphasized that the decision of an adult to live with an individual of his or her choice is strictly a right of that individual.

When this right is infringed, it would constitute breach of his or her fundamental right to life and personal liberty, the Court added.

"I say so for the reason that irrespective of the conversion being under clout, the mere fact that the couple were living together, the alleged relationship can very well be classified as a relationship in the nature of marriage distinct from the relationship arising out of marriage, in view of the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005," the Court further said.

The Court also said that since the law is equal for all as per Article 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India, if two persons of same religion can reside together in a live- in relationship, then people having different religion may also live together in a live-in relationship.

"The Article 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India ensure equal treatment of all individual. It does not discriminate against citizens based on religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth," the judge said.

In conclusion, the Court said that it was the bounden duty of the State to protect the life and liberty of every citizen. It added that the right to human life is to be treated on much higher pedestal, regardless of a citizen's religious belief. 

"The mere fact that the petitioners are living in an interfaith relationship, would not deprive them of their fundamental right as envisaged in Constitution of India, being citizens of India. No discrimination can be made on the basis of caste, creed, sex or religion," the judge said.

Granting a relief to the couples, the Court said that they are at liberty to approach the police authorities for redressal of their grievances.

"Upon receipt of such application, the police authorities shall examine the matter and age of the petitioners and if they find any substance in the allegations of the petitioners, they will act in accordance with law for protection of life, limb and liberty of the petitioners," the Court ordered.

It also said that they may lodge a report/complaint if anybody attempts to convert their religion against their wishes or by any fraudulent means.

Senior Counsel Shwetashwa Agarwal appeared as amicus curiae in the case. He was assisted by advocates Subir Lal, Sausthav Guha, Yashraj Verma, Dinkar Lal and Sirajuddin, who appeared for petitioners.

Additional Chief Standing Counsel Ashwani Kumar Tripathi and Prabhash Kumar Tiwari along with Standing Counsel Yogesh Kumar, Pramit Kumar Pal, Suresh Babu, Arvind Kumar Singh, Vijay Kumar Srivastava, and Phool Chand appeared for the State.

Allahabad High Court has previously ruled that a person professing Islam cannot claim the right to live-in relationship, particularly when he has a living spouse. A single judge in 2024 also ruled that the anti-conversion law applies to persons in live-in relationships too.

[Read Today's Judgment]