Prayagraj : While observing that an adult is entitled to determine his faith according to his own conscience, the Allahabad high court on Wednesday disposed of a petition, which was filed on the allegation of detention of a 31-year-old man by his father after he decided to convert to Islam and marry a Muslim woman.
His father had opposed the decision and lodged an FIR against the Muslim woman and her father, under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. The petitioner had submitted before the court that the person concerned was 31 years’ old and had renounced Hinduism and embraced Islam without any coercion, undue influence or inducement. They were later released on bail by the sessions court, Shamli.
The Shamli police produced the man before the court who said that he had converted to Islam voluntarily and wanted to marry a Muslim woman. Thereafter, he decided to marry a Muslim woman.
Earlier, the high court had on Sept 9 directed the father to produce his son before the court on Sept 16, to ascertain whether the allegations made in the writ petition were correct or not. Because it is not acceptable to his family members, such a choice, being an expression of individual autonomy and freedom of conscience, cannot be displaced merely.
Disposing of the Habeas Corpus writ petition filed by the petitioner, Justice Sandeep Jain observed, “A person who has attained majority is entitled to determine his faith according to his own conscience. The bench said that the choice of an adult as to whom he or she wished to marry or with whom he or she wished to establish a relationship was a matter of individual autonomy. “The mere fact that such choice may be contrary to the wishes or expectations of the family cannot, by itself, furnish a legitimate basis for curtailing such choice,” it added.
“Likewise, the right to choose a person with whom one wishes to establish a matrimonial relationship forms an integral facet of the right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution,” the court said.