Gujarat High Court
Munilal Ramvilas Vishwakarma vs State Of Gujarat on 7 March, 2022
Bench: Mauna M. Bhatt
R/SCR.A/2074/2022 ORDER DATED: 07/03/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2074 of 2022
==========================================================
MUNILAL RAMVILAS VISHWAKARMA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HARSHIL C DATTANI(6241) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 4,5,6,7
MS JIRGA JHAVERI,ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
and
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT
Date : 07/03/2022
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI)
1. Today the corpus is brought before us,
she has also met her parents. She has
spoken to the parents and had expressed her
wish not to join them. The Court has also
spoken to both of them and to the paternal
uncle of the boy, who has come since both
the parents of the boy have passed away in
last two years, one due to the heart attack
and other because of the cancer. The couple
R/SCR.A/2074/2022 ORDER DATED: 07/03/2022
has decided to continue to follow their
respective religion and therefore, they
need to get married under the Special
Marriage Act, 1954.
2. Notice as required under the Special
Marriage Act, 1954 shall be given. So we
had also asked her as to whether after
talking to the parents she was willing to
consider to reflect upon the same for 30
days as is the requirement of the law.
However, she appears to be quite firm in
that decision that she is desirous of
joining the respondent No.4.
3. Respondent No.6 is also present before
this Court, he has ensured the Court that
he will take all possible care. They are
represented by the learned advocate,
Mr.Rajendra Thakore.
R/SCR.A/2074/2022 ORDER DATED: 07/03/2022
4. Noticing the decision of the Apex Court
rendered in case of Laxmibai Chandaragi B.
and Anr. vs. State of Karnataka and others,
reported in (2021) 3 SCC 360, where the
Court had equated the right to marry a
person of one's choice being an integral to
Article 21 of the Constitution of India,
Some of the relevant findings and
observation of the Apex Court deserves
reproduction which are as follow:
"10. Educated younger boys and girls are choosing
their life partners which, in turn is a departure from the
earlier norms of society where caste and community play a
major role. Possibly, this is the way forward where caste
and community tension will reduce by such inter-marriage
but in the meantime these youngsters face threats from the
elders and the courts have been coming to the aid of these
youngsters.
11. We are fortified in our view by earlier judicial
pronouncements of this Court clearly elucidating that the
consent of the family or the community or the clan is not
necessary once the two adult individuals agree to enter
into a wedlock and that their consent has to be piously
R/SCR.A/2074/2022 ORDER DATED: 07/03/2022
given primacy. It is in that context it was further observed
that the choice of an individual is an inextricable part of
dignity, for dignity cannot be thought of where there is
erosion of choice. Such a right or choice is not expected
to succumb to the concept of "class honour" or "group
thinking".
12. In Shafin Jahan vs. Asokan K.M. this Court
noticed that the society was emerging through a crucial
transformational period. Intimacies of marriage lie within a
core zone of privacy, which is inviolable and even matters
of faith held to be integral to Article 21 of the
Constitution of India. In this behalf, the judgment of the
nine-Judge Bench in K.S.Puttaswamy (Privacy-9 J.) v.
Union of India may also be referred to where the
autonomy of an individual inter alia in relation to family
and marriage were held to be integral to the dignity of the
individual."
5. We chose to dispose of this petition
with a direction that the copy of the
notice for the marriage and once the
registration of the marriage is received,
the same shall be produced before the
Registrar (Judicial).
R/SCR.A/2074/2022 ORDER DATED: 07/03/2022
6. In the event of any difficulties
because of the interfaith marriage bearing
in mind this decision as well as the
decision of the Shakti Vahini vs. Union of
India, reported in (2018) 7 SCC 192, the
Superintendent of Police, Jamnagar shall
provide the necessary security.
7. With the above direction, present
petition stands disposed of.
(SONIA GOKANI, J)
(MAUNA M. BHATT,J)
M.M.MIRZA
