States without protection for inter-faith, inter-caste couples in contempt of SC: Mihir Desai
In an interview with The Hindu, Mr. Desai emphasised the urgent need for a national law to protect the rights of individuals entering interfaith and intercaste marriages. 'An overwhelming majority of the States do not have the mechanism to protect such couples. In fact, by not having these mechanisms, they are in complete violation of the Supreme Court orders. They are in contempt,' he said.
Mr. Desai drew a parallel with the Vishakha guidelines on workplace sexual harassment, noting that codification into law could provide the much-needed legal framework. 'If a law is properly worded and drafted in the right spirit, it would be very welcome,' he added, while expressing doubt about the political will for such legislation.
The lawyer was speaking in the context of a recent order issued by the Maharashtra government, which laid out detailed Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for the protection of inter-faith and inter-caste couples. The order followed sustained monitoring by the Bombay High Court in response to a petition filed by Mr. Desai on behalf of a Hindu man and a Muslim woman who were forced to flee to Delhi in 2022 following threats over their decision to marry.
The couple approached the Bombay High Court in September 2023, seeking protection and safe housing. After nearly two years of court-monitored proceedings, the Maharashtra government submitted SOPs that satisfied the court, leading to the disposal of the petition.
Mr. Desai expressed gratitude to the High Court, stating that the State's response would not have materialised without judicial intervention. 'On its own, the State government would not have acted - especially in a political environment where there is hostility towards inter-faith marriages, and a focus on so-called 'freedom of religion' laws that are effectively aimed at curbing conversions, rather than safeguarding individual autonomy,' he said.
Systemic Patriarchy and Social Backlash
Reflecting on the broader societal landscape, Mr. Desai said, 'Even today, inter-caste marriages are shunned. Just look at the matrimonial columns. There is fierce resistance to inter-faith marriages not just from families, but also from communal forces across all religions.'
He noted that the threats and violence faced by such couples reflect deep-rooted patriarchal and regressive attitudes. 'The idea that an adult woman has the agency to choose her partner is still difficult for many to accept. That is how patriarchy operates in India,' he said.
Need for Proactive State Intervention
Mr. Desai also criticised the general reluctance of the State to proactively defend the individual's fundamental right to choose a life partner. 'The State needs to step in - even if it means confronting societal pressure - to uphold the rule of law and constitutional rights,' he said.
The Shaktivahini judgment, delivered in the context of caste-based violence and khap panchayats in Haryana, recognised that inter-faith couples also face significant threats across the country. The guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in 2018 called for: (1) helplines to report threats and seek immediate assistance, (2) special cells for lodging complaints, and (3) safe houses for couples at risk of violence.
This week, Maharashtra became one of the few States to formally implement all three components.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
High Court acquits all 12 convicted in 2006 Mumbai train blasts case
The Bombay High Court on Monday acquitted all 12 men who were convicted of the 2006 Mumbai train bombings that killed 189 people and injured over 800. The acquittal came nearly two decades after the serial blasts shook Mumbai's suburban railway network.A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Gauri Godse read out the operative part of the order, pointing out serious flaws in the prosecution's case. The court observed that key witnesses were unreliable, identification parades were questionable, and confessional statements were extracted through defence had raised serious questions about the test identification parade. Many witnesses remained silent for unusually long periods, some over four years, and then suddenly identified the accused. This is abnormal," the bench noted. One witness, the court found, had deposed in multiple unrelated crime branch cases, including the Ghatkopar blast case, making his testimony 'unreliable'. Several others failed to explain how they could suddenly recall and identify the accused after judges also highlighted procedural lapses. "Some witnesses were not even examined during the trial. As for recoveries like RDX and other explosive material, the prosecution could not establish that the evidence was sacrosanct until it reached the Forensic Science Laboratory," the bench "non-application of mind", the High Court concluded that the prosecution had "thoroughly failed" to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. "It is difficult to say that the prosecution can sustain its charges," the bench held, quashing the special Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) court's October 2015 judgment that had sentenced five to death and seven to life the 12 originally convicted, one, Kamal Ansari, died in 2021 due to Covid-19 while lodged in Nagpur prison. The remaining 11, who have spent 19 years behind bars, are now set to walk Yug Mohit Chaudhry, representing some of the accused, said, "This judgment will be a sign of hope for those wrongly incarcerated". The bench responded, "We did our duty and it was our responsibility".Public Prosecutor Raja Thakare, while acknowledging the verdict, said the judgment would serve as a "guiding light" for future 2006 Mumbai train blasts remain one of India's deadliest terror attacks, with seven bombs exploding in first-class compartments during peak hours on the Western Railway line.- Ends
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
2006 Mumbai train blasts: Bombay HC acquits all 12 accused; says prosecution utterly failed to prove case against them
MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Monday refused to confirm the death sentence for five convicted in the 2006 July 11 synchronised and acquitted all 12 accused who had been convicted in September 2015 by a special MCOCA trial court. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The HC set aside the September 30, 2015 judgment of the special MCOCA court, finding no evidence to uphold the guilty verdict. The HC held that the prosecution failed to establish its case against all the accused. The prosecution failed to say what kind of explosive was used, its confession statements failed the test of validity, accepted defence arguments of torture before alleged confessions and the HC also discarded the identification parade, for want of proper authority, as well as deposition of witnesses who identified the accused during trial as lacking credibility. The trial court had sentenced seven to life. On Jan 31 this year, after almost seven months of hearing appeals and confirmation references, a special HC bench of Justices Anil Kilor and S.M. Chandak had reserved judgment on the fate of five individuals sentenced to death by a special trial court in 2015 for the synchronised train bombings of July 11, 2006, in Mumbai, along with seven other convicts. In criminal law, a death sentence given by a trial court needs to be first confirmed by the higher court to be an executable sentence. The trial court verdict, while granting the death penalty to five of the convicts, stated, "It was mindless, cold-blooded, and wanton killings of innocent, defenceless, and unsuspecting persons. The SPP has rightly described the accused as 'Merchants of death.'" Raja Thakare, the Special Public Prosecutor, had argued that the case stands strong, the trial court verdict cannot be dislodged, and death sentences should be confirmed. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The prosecution stated that bombs were planted in pairs of one local man and one Pakistani accused. The conviction relied primarily on the confessions of the accused to nail them. The defence counsel before the High Court argued at length, stating the data and confessions of 11—recorded only after the stringent MCOCA Act was invoked to enable the use of such confessions—were "inadmissible evidence," being "products of torture, fabrication, violation of due process, and falsehood." Chaudhri argued that "within a few days of the recording of their confessions, all the accused complained of coercion and torture. " The defence had argued that confessions were 'not genuine'' and their contention was backed by the fact that accused Mohd Faisal Shaikh, the alleged mastermind of the offence, and four planters given the capital punishment by the trial court were silent on who planted the bomb in the Mahim and Bandra blasts. The HC found merit in the defence contentions. The case is better known as the 7/11 train blasts case. The RDX explosives killed 189 and injured 827 others, according to the trial court verdict. Bombs planted on trains exploded during the peak evening office rush hour at seven locations between Khar Road and Santacruz, Bandra and Khar Road, Jogeshwari and Mahim Junction, Mira Road and Bhayander, Matunga and Mahim Junction, and Borivli. The convicts joined via videoconferencing from prisons across the state, including Pune's Yerwada and prisons in Nashik, Amravati, and Nagpur. One of them, Naved Hussain Khan, sentenced to death by the special trial court for being a bomb planter, had during the HC hearings spoken for himself from the Nagpur Central Prison when the bench gave them an opportunity. He said that he was "not involved in this case" and "did not even know these other people except" one prior to the arrests. He said he suffered for 19 years needlessly and, while people lost their lives, innocents can't be hanged either. The special MCOCA trial court Judge Y.D. Shinde had found all 11 confession statements voluntary and none exculpatory. Thakare, who conducted the trial as SPP and had sought the noose for eight of the 12 finally convicted, also argued the confirmation case for the state before the HC. Assisted by advocate Siddharth Jagushte, Thakare had argued that the prosecution evidence presented before the court was cogent then and now. For the 12 men, the defence team included advocate Yug Chaudhri, Payoshi Roy, and senior advocates S. Nagamuthu, Nitya Ramakrishnan, S. Muralidharan, apart from advocates Gaurav Bhawnani, Hetali Sheth, Khan Ishrat, and Aditya Mehta. The lawyers representing the convicts argued that their 'extra-judicial confessional statements' obtained by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) through 'torture' were inadmissible under the law. They also argued that the accused were falsely implicated, innocent and were languishing in jail for 18 years without substantial evidence, and their prime years were gone in incarceration. The appellants said that the trial court erred in convicting them and therefore the said order be set aside. The convicts Kamal Ansari from Bihar, Mohammad Faisal Ataur Rahman Shaikh from Mumbai, Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddiqui from Thane, Naveed Hussain Khan from Secunderabad, and Asif Khan from Jalgaon in Maharashtra were found guilty of planting the bombs and sentenced to death by the trial court. Ansari, one of the convicts on death row, died due to Covid-19 in Nagpur prison in 2021. Those awarded life term were Tanveer Ahmed Mohammed Ibrahim Ansari, Mohammed Majid Mohammed Shafi, Shaikh Mohammed Ali Alam Shaikh, Mohammed Sajid Margub Ansari, Muzammil Ataur Rahman Shaikh, Suhail Mehmood Shaikh, and Zameer Ahmed Latiur Rehman Shaikh. One of the accused, Wahid Shaikh, was acquitted by the trial court after nine years in jail. The Maharashtra government in 2015 approached the HC with pleas seeking confirmation of the death penalty granted to five convicts. On the other hand, the convicts filed appeals challenging the special court order. In July 2024, the HC had constituted the special bench in the matter after convicts sought an expedited hearing. After the pronouncement, Yug Chaudhry, Nitya Ramakrishnan, lawyers for the accused—This judgment will go a long way in restoring the faith of people in the judiciary, as it shows that 11 persons can be held to be innocent and acquitted in face of strongest opposition by the prosecution. On videoconference, Sr advocates S. Nagamuthu, S. Muralidhar for the accused: We express our gratitude for patient hearing. Special Public Prosecutor Raja Thakare: We are grateful for ample opportunity. We have learnt a lot. This judgment will be landmark and a guiding torch for all.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Interfaith marriage case: Muslim man marries Hindu woman; Haryana panchayat orders separation
ROHTAK: A panchayat held in Patuwas village in Haryana's Charkhi Dadri district on Sunday directed that an interfaith marriage couple be separated and declared a social boycott of the Muslim man's family across three villages. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The four-hour meeting, attended by residents of Patuwas, Mahraana, and Kheri Sanwal villages, was convened over tensions sparked by the marriage of Shahid, a Muslim man, and Preeti, a Hindu woman, both from the district. Village heads Kapoor Singh and Dharampal, who presided over the gathering, said Shahid would not be allowed to return. "His grandfather has agreed that Shahid will not come back to the village," said Dharampal. The panchayat further ruled out any social ties with Shahid's family. The village heads also stated that the couple would be separated. Dharampal said, 'The separation process is already under way.' The controversy erupted on July 3, when Shahid and Preeti were married through a nikah (Islamic marriage ceremony). Protests broke out on July 6 after villagers learned of the union, leading to the forced closure of shops owned by Muslims in the area. Efforts on to defuse tensions Police deployed personnel to Shahid's family home to maintain peace, and security remains in place. Efforts to defuse tensions have been ongoing, with local leaders working under village head Dharampal to mediate the issue. Both had signed affidavits agreeing to live separately and were released from a govt-run safe house to their families. However, dissatisfaction persisted among some village youth, prompting the Sunday's panchayat.
