Justice Salil Kumar of Allahabad HC Reunites Interfaith Lovers, Slams UP Cops for Illegal Custody

A Plea for Liberty Reaches the High Court

Allahabad high court happened to be the centre stage of a major human rights drama recently. One of the young men made a petition in the court, frantically requesting to release his partner. The two were of diverse religious beliefs which had been forcibly separated. The female patient was supposedly in custody against her wish, which made her partner turn to the urgent assistance of the judges. It was a case that represented the underlying social difficulties interfaith couples have to put up with in Uttar Pradesh state.

The legal instrument that was employed by the man was a petition petition of habeas corpus that is one of the most potent writs of the Indian Constitution. This is a Latin expression which means produce the body. It is one of the basic rights guaranteeing people against unlawful detention. In case of filing such a petition, the court may direct the police, or any other authority to present the arrested individual before the court to establish whether or not his/her custody is lawful.

In the particular instance, the petitioner claimed that his partner was an adult and had every right to make her own choices in life. He alleged that she was detained unlawfully, perhaps in one of the state shelters homes or by the police upon request of her family that did not approve of their relationship. This prepared the ground to one of the crucial hearings on the issue of individual freedom and that of society or police coercion.

The case was presented to Justice Salil Kumar Mukherjee who saw how serious the situation was. The question of the matter was not merely one of a relationship, but of the very right of an adult citizen to be free and to take his or her own way. The court had to determine the personal desires of the woman without any coercion or threat in the first place.

Justice Mukherjee Upholds Personal Choice

The entire case depended on the testimony of the woman when the woman was brought before the court. She was courageous enough to affirm before Justice Mukherjee that she was an adult and perfectly fit to make her own decisions. She said explicitly that she was a free choice relationship with the petitioner and that she wanted to be with him. The quote helped to prove that, her arrest did take place against her will.

The answer given by the Justice Mukherjee was deeply entrenched in the provisions of the Indian Constitution. He noted that all adult citizens have the irrefutable right to decide on their partner and their lifestyle. Article 21 is a pivotal right in the right to Life and Personal Liberty, which entails this right. The court concluded that even family members, community groups or even the state could not take away this right.

This observation of the court was obvious rejection of any encroachment in the personal life of two consenting adults. Justice Mukherjee made it clear that love, partnership and marriage are personal issues. The fact that society does not appreciate it or parents are against it cannot be a justification to the police or the state to meddle and deny a person his or her freedom. The judge clarified that the decision taken by the woman was the most important.

According to her uncomplimentary words, Justice Mukherjee at once gave her the order to release her. He decided she should go as far as she wanted and do whatever she wanted to do. This bold dictum did not only help the interreligious pair come back together but also delivered a strong signal to emphasize on the importance of personal choice over social bigotry. The emotional reuniting process of the couple was witnessed in the chambers of the court that was defended by a strong judicial defense of the rights of the couple.

Sharp Criticism of Police Conduct

Justice Mukherjee did not end with getting the woman free. He sprayed sharp and strictly targeted criticism on the Uttar Pradesh Police on their actions over the issue. The court was also extremely dissatisfied with the role played by the police. It was discovered that the law enforcers, the police, had been inappropriate in detaining the adult woman and detaining her without her consent, an illegal detention.

The judge indicated that police officers had greatly exceeded their legal mandate. The police seemed to have succumbed to the wishes of the family of the woman instead of safeguarding the right of the couple to coexist. The court considered this as the improper exercise of their authority and total neglect of their constitutional mandate of upholding the rights of every citizen without discrimination.

Through his comments Justice Mukherjee reminded the police that they are not moral police but enforcers of the rule of law. They cannot and ought not to become representatives of families or groups who want to force their will on adult children. The judge emphasized that it is the main responsibility of the police force to protect individual liberty rather than turn into a weapon of its repression.

Another issue that the court has specifically criticized was the fact that the woman had been detained in a protection home without any legal or judicial order. This right of detaining her even though she was a grown-up who had not committed a crime was a clear breach of her basic rights. The harsh language used by the judge was a bitter lesson to the law enforcement agencies that they can not afford to engage in such high-handed and criminal activities.

The Shadow of State Law

Although the given case is centred on a single couple, it should be viewed in the context of the controversial anti-conversion law in Uttar Pradesh. The UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 has been the point of heated discussions. Although its official objective is to stop forced religious conversions, critics and human rights organizations claim that its clauses are constantly abused in order to discriminate interfaith couples.

The legislation has resulted in a culture of fear especially in all couples that have a Muslim man and a Hindu woman. It provides the families with a strong legal tool to fight such relations. Even in cases where it is all a matter of consent, they can make a police complaint accusing forced conversion. This usually results in the arrest of the man and forcible handing over of the woman to her parents or taken to a shelter home.