Gujarat High Court refuses to modify stay on provisions of Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021

The Gujarat High Court on Thursday refused to modify its August 19 stay on the operation of Sections 3, 4, 4A to 4C, 5, 6, 6A of the Gujarat Freedom of Religion (Amendment) Act, 2021 (Jamiat Ulama-E-Hind Gujarat vs. State of Gujarat)..The State had urged the Court to lift its stay on Section 5, contending that it is unrelated to marriage..Turning down the request, however, the Division Bench of Chief Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Biren Vaishnav said,"We do not find any reason to make any changes to the order passed by us on 19th August.".Yesterday, Advocate General Kamal Trivedi had appeared before the Bench and stated that Section 5 of the Act was unrelated to marriage and only related to permission for conversion. .It was, brought to the Court’s attention that the Section was not mentioned in any of the earlier interim orders but appeared in the last order. Therefore, the State sought rectification of the same. .The relevant portion of the August 19 order had read:“We are therefore of the opinion that pending further hearing the rigours of Sections 3, 4, 4A to 4C, 5, 6, 6A shall not operate merely because the marriage is solemnised by a person of one religion with another without force or by allurement or by fraudulent means and such marriages cannot be termed as marriages for the purposes of unlawful conversion. The above interim order is provided only on the lines of the arguments advanced by Mr Trivedi, learned Advocate General and to protect the parties solemnised in marriage interfaith from being unnecessarily harassed.”.Senior Advocate Mihir Joshi, for the petitioners, vehemently opposed any modification of the stay order today, assuring that no error was committed by the Court in including Section 5. “If Section 5 is not included, then the entire order is unworkable. The intention of your Lordships, of marriages being saved, would not operate without Section 5", Joshi contended..On the other hand, Advocate General Kamal Trivedi argued that the language of the order implied the stay on Section 5 would operate even in cases of voluntary, lawful conversion..“When the Section deals with lawful conversion, why should it be stayed? Lordship may say that for lawful conversion, permission is required", he argued..Justice Biren Vaishnav pointed out an intrinsic challenge that would arise if Section 5 is not stayed. .“You will haul up a person under Section 5, even if it is with consent, you will say permission was not sought", he pointed out..Chief Justice Vikram Nath went on to clarify that the stay on Section 5 was only in relation to permission for where there is conversion along with marriage and that the stay would not fall in the way of permission for conversion for other reasons..AG Trivedi requested that this may be clarified by the Court. However, the Bench did not deem this necessary..[Read live updates here]