"Private Space"
Making public notices optional under Special Marriage Act is a relief for inter-faith couples
The Allahabad High Court ruling (फैसला; decision, judgement) that people marrying under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, can choose not to publicise (प्रचार करना; to make information about something generally available) their union (मिलन; the union of two people refers to marriage) with a notice 30 days in advance may not exactly be a judicial pushback (न्यायिक धक्का; negative reaction to a change or to something new that has been introduced by a law court) against problematic anti-conversion laws enacted (नियम बनाना; to put something into action or to make a law) by several BJP-ruled States.
Click Here To Take SPOTTING COMMON ERRORS Tests
But it serves to get a major irritant (चिढ़ पैदा करने वाला/तकलीफ़ देने वाला; something that causes trouble or makes you annoyed) out of the way of couples wanting to marry against the wishes of their parents or their immediate community (तात्कालिक समुदाय; in the present society or social group). Many inter-caste and interfaith marriages have faced violent opposition from those acting in the name of community pride (सामुदायिक गौरव; feeling and respect for your community or society) or those raising the bogey (हौवा खड़ा करना; something that causes fear among a lot of people, often without reason) of ‘love jihad’. Hindutva activists have been targeting Muslim men marrying Hindu women, especially if the women have converted to Islam prior to the marriage.
The court said that mandatorily publishing a notice of the intended marriage (इच्छित विवाह; the person who you are going to marry) and calling for objections violates (उल्लंघन करना; fail to respect or comply with) the right to privacy. According to the new order, if a couple gives it in writing that they do not want the notice publicised, the Marriage Officer can solemnise the marriage (विधिपूर्वक विवाह संपादित करना; to perform the official marriage ceremony). Under Section 5 of the Act, which enables interfaith marriages, the couple has to give notice to the Marriage Officer; and under Sections 6 and 7, the officer has to publicise the notice and call for (की मांग करना/आवश्यकता होना; to say publicly that something should happen or is necessary) objections (आपत्ति/एतराज़; a feeling or expression of dislike, or disapproval).
Click Here To Take CLOZE Tests
But, in his order, Justice Vivek Chaudhary said the Act’s interpretation (व्याख्या/स्पष्टीकरण; an explanation or opinion of what something means) has to be such that it upholds (बनाए रखना; to keep or defend a principle or law) fundamental rights, not violate them. Laws should not invade (दखल देना; to spoil a situation without thinking about one’s feeling) liberty (स्वतंत्रता; the freedom to live as you wish) and privacy, he said, “including within its sphere (क्षेत्र; a range or an area of activity) freedom to choose for marriage without interference (हस्तक्षेप; an occasion when someone tries to involve in a situation, especially he/she is is not wanted) from state and non-state actors, of the persons concerned”.
The HC ruling came on the plea of a Muslim woman who converted to Hinduism for marriage as the couple saw the notice period under the Special Marriage Act as an invasion of their privacy (निजता पर आक्रमण; the act of entering or spoiling someone's privacy). Justice Chaudhary’s remarks on ‘state and non-state actors’ will undoubtedly (निस्संदेह रूप से; very likely; almost certainly) be read in the context of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition (निषेध/प्रतिबंध; the act of officially not allowing something) of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance (अध्यादेश; a law or rule made by a government or authority), 2020, that particularly targets interfaith marriages.
Frequently Asked SYNONYMS With Hindi Meanings
This new law declares conversion of religion (धर्म-परिवर्तन; a process in which someone changes to a new religion or belief) by marriage to be unlawful, mandates (जनादेश; the authority given to an elected government to govern a country or state) a 60-day notice to the District Magistrate and also requires the Magistrate to conduct a police inquiry to find out the explicit (स्पष्ट; clear and exact) reason for the conversion.
Enacted last November, there have been 54 arrests till date by the U.P. police. The HC ruling can now be cited (हवाला देना/उल्लेख करना; to mention something as proof or as a reason why something has happened) across India to prevent public notices under the Special Marriage Act. Interfaith couples will hope that when the Supreme Court hears pleas (दलील/याचिका; an urgent and emotional request) on the U.P. conversion law, it will be guided by progressive verdicts (प्रगतिशील फैसलों; developing or gradually happening judgement or decision), such as the 2017 Aadhaar ruling, on the right to privacy as a basic right, and the 2018 judgment on Hadiya, upholding the student’s right to choose a partner, a Muslim man in Kerala, as an essential freedom.
0 Comments