Can UP interfaith live-in couples get police protection? Yes, no, maybe

Records show that the High Court dismissed pleas for police protection from at least 12 interfaith couples in live-in relationships since August 2023, signalling in eight of them that UP’s Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, criminalises such relationships. In all 12 cases, the court was informed by both partners that they were in a consensual relationship.

Records also show that in at least three other cases — again, consensual, inter-faith — including one dating back to January last year, the court granted police protection to live-in couples under the same law but with conditions. In two of these cases, the key rider was that the couple had to register their marriage under the new anti-conversion law within a stipulated time period.

These 15 cases were heard by six different benches of the High Court, and their contrasting positions assume significance since the law has been challenged in the Supreme Court along with similar laws from some other states.

UP’s anti-conversion law requires prior sanction from the state for religious conversion and prohibits such conversion for the purpose of marriage. Section 3(1) of this law prohibits conversion by misrepresentation, force, fraud, undue influence, coercion, allurement, etc. This includes “conversion by solemnisation of marriage or relationship in the nature of marriage” if it falls under any of the prohibited grounds.

In eight of the 12 cases where police protection was denied, the High Court cited the portion in Section 3(1) that includes “conversion by solemnisation of marriage or relationship in the nature of marriage” — and equated live-in relationships with “relationship in the nature of marriage”. Records show these grounds were first raised by the state government in at least nine of these cases.

In the latest instance of this provision being invoked, the High Court on April 4 initially declined cover to an interfaith couple in a case where a Muslim man faced an FIR in which he was accused of kidnapping a Hindu woman and compelling her into marriage. Both the partners had moved the court against the FIR.

“Section 3(1) of the aforesaid Act, 2021 prohibits such living relationship, which is in the nature of matrimonial bonds… in view of the above, the FIR cannot be quashed unless they solemnise their marriage in accordance with law,” a bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Narendra Kumar Johari stated.

The High Court’s ruling was based on the ground that the marriage was not solemnised by declaring that one of the individuals has undergone religious conversion under the anti-conversion law. However, the bench subsequently allowed the woman to go to a “protection home” in Lucknow until the marriage was solemnised, and provided a police escort noting that she “apprehends harm from her family member”.

This year, between February and March alone, High Court Justice Renu Agarwal rejected nine petitions from interfaith couples for protection with orders that either state “…such type of act cannot be supported and protected by the Court. Therefore, the petition has no substance and is liable to be dismissed” or “…it is not considered desirable that live-in-relationship of the petitioners be protected in contravention of the statutory provisions of law…hence, petition has no force and is liable to be dismissed and is dismissed accordingly.”

In seven of these cases, Justice Agarwal underlined that the “Conversion Act applies to relationships in the nature of marriage or live-in relationship” under Section 3(1). The court held that protection could not be granted as “Petitioners have not yet applied for conversion as per provisions of Section 8 and 9 of the Act, hence, the relationship of petitioners cannot be protected”.

Under Sections 8 and 9 of UP’s anti-conversion law, for a marriage to be solemnised between interfaith couples, the partners who decide to convert must submit a declaration to a District Magistrate before and after conversion. This process also involves the police conducting an enquiry to determine the “real intention” of conversion and the District Magistrate publishing post-conversion declarations, including details such as permanent address, name of father or husband and of the conversion process itself.

In another case, in March 2024, Justice Agarwal’s order stated that live-in relationships were prohibited in Islam. “In fact any sexual, lustful, affectionate acts such as kissing, touching, staring, etc., are ‘Haram’ in Islam before marriage because these are considered parts of ‘Zina’ which may lead to actual ‘Zina’ itself,” the order stated.

Living together ‘out of their own free will’

However, the Allahabad High Court has also granted police protection to such couples under the same law in at least three other cases over the past year.

In two such cases last year, on January 24 and 27, Justice Deepak Verma granted protection to interfaith couples in live-in relationships on the condition that they apply for conversion under Sections 8 and 9 within two weeks.

In both cases, records show, Justice Verma ruled that the protection granted will be automatically “vacated” (revoked) if the couples did not follow the court’s directions.

In the third case, Justice Arun Kumar Deshwal noted that a couple had applied for religious conversion and held that protection would be granted once they verified that they were majors.

Similar legislation were also passed by BJP governments of the time in several other states, including Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, Jharkhand and Uttarakhand. Karnataka, which had passed a similar law in 2021, repealed it after the Congress government came to power last year.

The UP law is under challenge before the Supreme Court, as are similar laws passed by some of the other states.

In 2020, Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) approached the apex court against the UP law, arguing that it violated the right to privacy, individual liberty and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. The CJP has also challenged the anti-conversion laws of Himachal, Uttarakhand and Madhya Pradesh.

In the Supreme Court, the case was last listed on April 25, 2023, and is pending before a bench led by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud. A petition to transfer all the challenges against similar laws in various states in the respective High Courts is also pending before the bench.