A 36-year-old Sikh man has filed a civil suit in the Chandigarh district courts seeking directions to restrain his Muslim wife and her relatives from forcibly converting him and his minor son to Islam.
The court of Rasveen Kaur, Civil Judge (Junior Division), has issued a notice to the defendants for July 20.
The plaintiff, who is a resident of Chandigarh, has submitted that he is Sikh by religion and by birth while his wife and in-laws are Muslim by birth.
The plaintiff’s counsel, advocate Dikshit Arora, has submitted in the petition that he met his would-be wife in 2008 while working in an office in Chandigarh, where he was a store incharge and she was a salesgirl. The two became friends and she proposed to him. He said no because they came from different religions. However, she persisted and promised him that religion will never become an issue. On this, they got married as per Sikh rituals in a gurdwara at Amritsar in November 2008.
However, the plaintiff alleges in the petition, from day one of the marriage, his wife and in- laws started forcing him to profess Muslim religion and to boycott Sikh religion. Due to this, he initially opted to stay away from his in-laws and went to Delhi where he stayed from 2008-2011. Later, he took up a job at Amritsar where he lived from 2011 to 2015.
In August 2012, his wife gave birth to a baby boy. He alleged from day one of the birth of his son, his wife and in-laws tried their best to convert the minor child to Islam but the plaintiff safeguarded him.
The plaintiff alleged the other relatives of his wife, including his brother-in-laws, also had been interfering in his married life.
In the suit filed, the plaintiff also alleged that the defendants, including his in-laws and other family members of his wife, asked him to get rid of his hair (Kesh). They tried to remove the “KARA” from the hand of the plaintiff, and insulted the plaintiff and his religion by throwing the turban from his head. The plaintiff also alleged that he was forced to eat Halal Meat instead of Jhatka Meat.
The plaintiff submitted that he previously made a complaint to the SSP concerned but it was of no use. The police party had failed to provide justice to him.