Personal Choices the Constitutions Endurance

Context: Recently, the Allahabad High Court (Salmat Ansari Case) declared that religious conversions, even when made solely for the purposes of marriage, constituted a valid exercise of a person’s liberties.

Background: Recently the government of Uttar Pradesh (UP) introduced an ordinance which makes the religious conversion, that is forcefully obtained an offence but also declares void, any conversion based solely for marriage.

Judicial backing to the UP government’s ordinance:

• In Noor Jahan v. State of U.P (2014): The High Court held that conversion by an individual to Islam was valid only when it was predicated on a “change of heart” and on an “honest conviction”.
• In Rev-Stanislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh: The Supreme Court upheld on the grounds of public order two anti-conversion statutes: (District Magistrate prohibits any conversion through fraud.)
  • The Madhya Pradesh Dharma Swatantrya Adhiniyam, 1968,
  • The Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967.

Constitutional Significance of Court’s Judgement on Religious Conversion:

• Safeguards Right to privacy: By invoking the Puttaswamy case, the SC held that an individual’s ability to control vital aspects of her life inheres in her right to privacy which includes -
  • Preservation of decisional autonomy, on matters of personal intimacies, the sanctity of family life, marriage, procreation, home, and sexual orientation.
• Recognises marriage as a matter of fundamental right to life: and overruled the Noor Jahan v. State of U.P. (2014) judgement.
  • The Constitution is violated every time matters of intimate and personal choice are made vulnerable to the paternal whims of the state.
• Recognises freedom of conscience: as a matter of ethical autonomy (a person’s own sense of moral right); It is an emotion that cannot be judged from the outside.
  • Article 25’s protection of freedom of conscience goes beyond mere considerations of religious faith and the State cannot examine it as a function of its by outlawing ‘Love jihad’.

Conclusion: We must acknowledge and respect the personal choices that people make - choices of faith and belief, choices of partners and our Constitution’s endurance depends on our ability to respect these decisions.