The Uttar Pradesh police have made more than one arrest a day under the Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Ordinance, 2020, which came into effect on 27 November.
Second BJP-ruled state after UP to give green signal to anti-conversion law, which will replace 1968 law in Madhya Pradesh. Shivraj govt to table bill in assembly session next week.
The Religious Freedom Bill 2020 provides for prison term of up to 10 years and fine of Rs 1 lakh for conversion through marriage or by any other fraudulent means.
Teen accused of trying to elope with the minor girl and convert her to Islam. But the girl's father — the complainant — claims he never made any such allegation.
Bajrang Dal is in the headlines over the ‘love jihad’ issue in UP, and over allegations that Facebook looked the other way despite internal call to ban it.
As many as 21 policy reforms are under implementation following Invest Kerala Global Summit, as LDF govt works to change perception that the state is not conducive to businesses.
Amid continued concerns over cross-border terrorism, General Upendra Dwivedi further warned the neighbour that India will not show restraint if there is an Op Sindoor 2.0.
Pakistan’s army has been a rentier force available to a reasonable bidder. It has never come to the aid of any Muslims including Palestinians or the Gazans, except making noises here and there.
No matter what laws you bring, unless the regressive mindset is changed (exemplified by none less than Justice Bobde), India will remain stuck in its past.
The cases highlighted by press all involves 18-21 olds, who are not financially independent, running away and getting converted to islam, they are not fully matured adults, more over they don’t get adequate protection under medeival muslim personal laws ,
Fully matured adults should not mind 1 month notice, Traditional marriage happen more than a month after betrothal
There is no provision for conversion in this act. But sometimes women are forced to convert after marriage. This law should be only for people who won’t convert. Those who want to convert can first get converted and then marry according to the Hindu or Muslim law.
The author seems to be either ill informed or carrying an agenda. She fails to recognise that religious marriage ceremonies don’t follow even personal laws and blatantly extends an argument that all religions restrict marriages between same faith couples only. Would like to get enlightened which Hindu scripture demand such requirement.
The author also fails to appreciate that although minisicule but some interfaith marriage have been found based on conceleled identities. In order to save the marriage one of the partner mostly women is left with no other choice than converting involuntarily. In this pretext what is the problem if all interfaith marriages are pre-verified.
On account of personal Liberty also author skips that even personal laws such as Hindu marriage act prohibits certain relationships. Is not that too an assault on personal liberty of consenting adults.
The crux of the matter is that in the name of personal Liberty few individuals wants to disregard all the social rules and create anarchy.
I understand the arguments and agree with most of them. Won’t a uniform civil code make it right? You have highlighted the difference between special marriages act and personal laws very well. However, if we have common civil laws only then we will have true equality due to differing rights in personal laws. Shouldn’t the argument be made that a marriage certification should not see religion at all? What is your stand on this?
No matter what laws you bring, unless the regressive mindset is changed (exemplified by none less than Justice Bobde), India will remain stuck in its past.
The cases highlighted by press all involves 18-21 olds, who are not financially independent, running away and getting converted to islam, they are not fully matured adults, more over they don’t get adequate protection under medeival muslim personal laws ,
Fully matured adults should not mind 1 month notice, Traditional marriage happen more than a month after betrothal
There is no provision for conversion in this act. But sometimes women are forced to convert after marriage. This law should be only for people who won’t convert. Those who want to convert can first get converted and then marry according to the Hindu or Muslim law.
The author seems to be either ill informed or carrying an agenda. She fails to recognise that religious marriage ceremonies don’t follow even personal laws and blatantly extends an argument that all religions restrict marriages between same faith couples only. Would like to get enlightened which Hindu scripture demand such requirement.
The author also fails to appreciate that although minisicule but some interfaith marriage have been found based on conceleled identities. In order to save the marriage one of the partner mostly women is left with no other choice than converting involuntarily. In this pretext what is the problem if all interfaith marriages are pre-verified.
On account of personal Liberty also author skips that even personal laws such as Hindu marriage act prohibits certain relationships. Is not that too an assault on personal liberty of consenting adults.
The crux of the matter is that in the name of personal Liberty few individuals wants to disregard all the social rules and create anarchy.
I understand the arguments and agree with most of them. Won’t a uniform civil code make it right? You have highlighted the difference between special marriages act and personal laws very well. However, if we have common civil laws only then we will have true equality due to differing rights in personal laws. Shouldn’t the argument be made that a marriage certification should not see religion at all? What is your stand on this?