SUNEET KUMAR
Mayra Alias Vaishnvi Vilas Shirshikar – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The judgment is being structured in the following framework to facilitate the discussion:
B. Rival Submissions
C. Anti Conversion Laws/Freedom of Religion Act
D. Law Governing Interfaith Marriage
E. Development of Law
F. Multiplicity of Marriage Law
G. Uniform Civil Code (UCC)
(i) Historical Perspective
(ii) Constituent Assembly Debate
(a) Objection to UCC
(b) Response to UCC
(c) UCC whether necessary or desirable
H. Hindu Family Code – Its impact
I. Personal liberty and Privacy
J. Analysis and Conclusions
K. Relief
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents.
3. Notice is not being issued to the contesting private respondents in view of the order proposed to be passed.
4. Petitions are being decided finally at the admission stage, as per Rules, on the consent of the parties.
A. Facts
5. The batch of petitions (17 in number), pertain to interfaith marriage contracted by the petitioners. Petitioners, herein, claim to be major and one of the party to the marriage has converted to the religion/faith of his/her partner. The petitioners apprehend threat to their life, liberty and wellbeing. Hence the instant writ petiti
Ahmedabad Women Action Group vs. Union of India
In Re. vs. Indian Woman Says Gang-Raped on Orders of Village Court
Jorden Diengdeh vs. S.C. Chopra
Madhya Pradesh v. Bhopal Sugar Industries
Mohd. Ahmad Khan vs. Shah Bano Begum
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India
S. Puttaswamy (PrivacyJ.) v. Union of India
Sarla Mudgal & others vs. Union of India and others; 1995 SCC (3) 635
Sarla Mudgal vs. Union of India
Satyawati Sharma v. Union of India
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.