SC asks lovelorn Muslim man to be loyal to Hindu wife

“Be a loyal husband. Not only be a great lover,” the Supreme Court on Wednesday told a Muslim man who claimed to have converted to Hinduism to marry a girl in Chhattisgarh. The top court said it was in favour of inter-caste and inter-faith marriages but the man must show genuineness.

On her father's claim that the marriage was just a sham and a racket to trap innocent girls, a bench of Justices Arun Mishra and M R Shah asked the man to file an affidavit, saying the court wanted to ensure the girl's future was secure.

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the girl's businessman-father, contended it was not a simple case of inter-faith marriage. He said the man had claimed to have converted to Hinduism and adopted a Hindu name to marry the girl at an Arya Samaj temple but he had got the marriage registered in his original Muslim name. He contended about 70-80 policemen had barged into his home on March 25 and forcefully taken away her daughter.

Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the man, submitted that the marriage in the case cannot be challenged as the girl was an adult of 24 years. He said the court may call the girl and ascertain the facts.

“At the time of marriage, he had converted. But they (the girl's parents) were not ready for 'ghar wapsi',” he said.

“We want to know whether he has converted for marriage or otherwise,” the court asked him. To this, he said at the time of marriage, they (the couple) may say anything.

“We are not averse to this kind of living together. We are all for inter-faith and inter-caste marriages. Have you changed your name? Have you taken all legal steps to change the name,” the bench asked the counsel.

The court was, however, quick to add that its queries were intended only to secure the future of the girl. “I will affidavit on bona fide within three days,” Dwivedi responded.

Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayana, appearing for the girl, said she wanted protection from her father.

The Chhattisgarh government, represented by advocate Nishanth Patil, contended that the present plea by the “disgruntled parents” was an abuse of the process of law. The girl, who was earlier on August 27, 2018, allowed by the apex court to exercise her right to live with the parents, now wanted to go with her husband and she should not be questioned for it.