States without protection for inter-faith, inter-caste couples in contempt of SC: Mihir Desai
Prominent human rights lawyer Mihir Desai has said that all States which have failed to put in place mechanisms for the protection of inter-faith and inter-caste couples are in contempt of the Supreme Court. He was referring to the apex court's 2018 Shaktivahini judgment, which directed all States to establish protective measures for such couples, including helplines, special cells, and safe houses.
In an interview with The Hindu, Mr. Desai emphasised the urgent need for a national law to protect the rights of individuals entering interfaith and intercaste marriages. 'An overwhelming majority of the States do not have the mechanism to protect such couples. In fact, by not having these mechanisms, they are in complete violation of the Supreme Court orders. They are in contempt,' he said.
Mr. Desai drew a parallel with the Vishakha guidelines on workplace sexual harassment, noting that codification into law could provide the much-needed legal framework. 'If a law is properly worded and drafted in the right spirit, it would be very welcome,' he added, while expressing doubt about the political will for such legislation.
The lawyer was speaking in the context of a recent order issued by the Maharashtra government, which laid out detailed Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for the protection of inter-faith and inter-caste couples. The order followed sustained monitoring by the Bombay High Court in response to a petition filed by Mr. Desai on behalf of a Hindu man and a Muslim woman who were forced to flee to Delhi in 2022 following threats over their decision to marry.
The couple approached the Bombay High Court in September 2023, seeking protection and safe housing. After nearly two years of court-monitored proceedings, the Maharashtra government submitted SOPs that satisfied the court, leading to the disposal of the petition.
Mr. Desai expressed gratitude to the High Court, stating that the State's response would not have materialised without judicial intervention. 'On its own, the State government would not have acted - especially in a political environment where there is hostility towards inter-faith marriages, and a focus on so-called 'freedom of religion' laws that are effectively aimed at curbing conversions, rather than safeguarding individual autonomy,' he said.
Systemic Patriarchy and Social Backlash
Reflecting on the broader societal landscape, Mr. Desai said, 'Even today, inter-caste marriages are shunned. Just look at the matrimonial columns. There is fierce resistance to inter-faith marriages not just from families, but also from communal forces across all religions.'
He noted that the threats and violence faced by such couples reflect deep-rooted patriarchal and regressive attitudes. 'The idea that an adult woman has the agency to choose her partner is still difficult for many to accept. That is how patriarchy operates in India,' he said.
Need for Proactive State Intervention
Mr. Desai also criticised the general reluctance of the State to proactively defend the individual's fundamental right to choose a life partner. 'The State needs to step in - even if it means confronting societal pressure - to uphold the rule of law and constitutional rights,' he said.
The Shaktivahini judgment, delivered in the context of caste-based violence and khap panchayats in Haryana, recognised that inter-faith couples also face significant threats across the country. The guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in 2018 called for: (1) helplines to report threats and seek immediate assistance, (2) special cells for lodging complaints, and (3) safe houses for couples at risk of violence.
This week, Maharashtra became one of the few States to formally implement all three components.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


India Today
12 minutes ago
- India Today
10% Maratha reservation to continue this year, hearing on fresh pleas from July 18
The Maratha reservation issue will once again come under judicial scrutiny, with a newly constituted full bench of the Bombay High Court set to begin hearings on fresh pleas from July 18. However, the 10 per cent reservation in education and government jobs given to the Maratha community will continue this bench, comprising Justices Ravindra Ghuge, NJ Jamadar and Sandeep Marne, announced on Wednesday that they would devote half-days, full working days and even some Saturdays - ordinarily court holidays - to complete the hearing hearing pertains to challenges against the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2024, which grants 10 per cent reservation in education and government jobs to the Maratha community. Under this order, any admission or job appointment made under the SEBC Act remains subject to final court directions. The matter was previously heard by a bench led by then-Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya. However, proceedings halted after his transfer to the Delhi High Court in January. Following this, some students approached the Supreme Court, citing harm to their admission prospects due to the ongoing legal uncertainty. The top court subsequently directed the Bombay High Court to constitute a new full bench, which has now taken Wednesday's hearing, senior advocate Pradeep Sancheti, representing the petitioners, urged the bench to expedite proceedings as the academic admission cycle was underway. He argued that, unlike job appointments, delayed admissions would be harder to rectify, even with the interim order in General Dr Birendra Saraf, appearing for the Maharashtra government, said the state needed more time to respond to the latest petition filed in court. He maintained that the interim order provided adequate safeguards and questioned the urgency shown by the petitioners. He also suggested that the petitioners withdraw the new plea if they were unwilling to allow time for the state to considering the submissions, the bench scheduled the hearing for five weeks SEBC Act, passed on February 20 last year by the Eknath Shinde-led Maharashtra government, followed recommendations by the Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission (MSBCC) led by retired Justice Sunil Shukre. The commission had concluded that "exceptional circumstances and extraordinary situations" warranted reservation for the Maratha community beyond the 50 per cent cap mandated by the Supreme legislation, which came just ahead of the Lok Sabha and assembly elections, sparked a series of public interest litigations and petitions challenging its constitutional validity. Simultaneously, numerous intervention applications have been filed by Maratha organisations defending the reservation and opposing the addition to the reservation issue, petitions have also been filed questioning the legality of Justice Shukre's appointment as chairperson of the Watch


Time of India
19 minutes ago
- Time of India
Bengal makes minor tweaks to OBC list struck down by HC
1 2 Kolkata: Bengal's new OBC list, tabled by state govt in the assembly on Tuesday, has minor changes compared to the previous list. While the earlier list, struck down by the Calcutta High Court, had 113 OBC subgroups with 77 Muslim and 36 others, the new OBC list has 140 subgroups, 80 of them Muslim. Supreme Court is hearing a challenge by Bengal govt against the HC scrapping of the earlier list, impacting around 5 lakh OBC certificates. The state had told the SC that it would complete its fresh OBC survey by the end of June. The survey tabled on Tuesday also indicated that state is hearing representations from 50 more OBC groups. The percentage of Muslims in the new OBC list is 57.1. While there are 73.4% Muslims in the OBC 'A' category (in a total of 49 subgroups, 36 are Muslims and 13 non-Muslims), OBC 'B' has 48.3% Muslims (there are 91 subgroups, of which 44 are Muslims, and 47 are non-Muslims). The HC ruling had reduced 17% OBC reservations in the state to 7%. The report tabled on Tuesday allows Bengal govt to restore OBC reservation to 17%, allocating 7% for OBC 'A' and 10% for OBC 'B'. This is set to increase slightly with 50 additional groups being evaluated. The legal deadlock on the OBC issue had an overriding impact in Bengal, from pausing admissions to schools, colleges and universities to state govt recruitments. CM Mamata Banerjee, speaking in the assembly on Tuesday, had said that the issuance of OBC certificates for college admissions and govt jobs would resume immediately. "Many recruitment boards kept the process on hold due to the legal confusion. That will now be resolved," Banerjee had said, adding, "Backwardness, not religion, was the sole criterion in the fresh OBC survey." On Tuesday, Bengal leader of opposition Suvendu Adhikari had alleged that the OBC list was flawed and stemmed from "appeasement politics". He said that there were only 11 Muslim groups out of 66 OBC groups before 2010. Adhikari went on to claim that OBC in Bengal meant 'one-sided beneficiary'. Questioning Adhikari's facts, Trinamool Congress had said in a statement on Tuesday: "Suvendu Adhikari, we all know that 'divide and rule' is the official policy of BJP, and your only agenda for the 2026 elections is to pit Hindus against Muslims. But CM Mamata Banerjee has made it crystal clear that backwardness, not religion, is the sole criterion for OBC status. The new list was prepared with that principle in mind. So stop misleading the people with your lies."


Time of India
42 minutes ago
- Time of India
West Bengal makes minor tweaks to OBC list struck down by HC
KOLKATA: Bengal's new OBC list, tabled by state govt in the assembly on Tuesday, has minor changes compared to the previous list. While the earlier list, struck down by the Calcutta High Court, had 113 OBC subgroups with 77 Muslim and 36 others, the new OBC list has 140 subgroups, 80 of them Muslim. Supreme Court is hearing a challenge by Bengal govt against the HC scrapping of the earlier list, impacting around 5 lakh OBC certificates. The state had told the SC that it would complete its fresh OBC survey by the end of June. The survey tabled on Tuesday also indicated that state is hearing representations from 50 more OBC groups. The percentage of Muslims in the new OBC list is 57.1. While there are 73.4% Muslims in the OBC 'A' category (in a total of 49 subgroups, 36 are Muslims and 13 non-Muslims), OBC 'B' has 48.3% Muslims (there are 91 subgroups, of which 44 are Muslims, and 47 are non-Muslims). The HC ruling had reduced 17% OBC reservations in the state to 7%. The report tabled on Tuesday allows Bengal govt to restore OBC reservation to 17%, allocating 7% for OBC 'A' and 10% for OBC 'B'. This is set to increase slightly with 50 additional groups being evaluated. The legal deadlock on the OBC issue had an overriding impact in Bengal, from pausing admissions to schools, colleges and universities to state govt recruitments. CM Mamata Banerjee, speaking in the assembly on Tuesday, had said that the issuance of OBC certificates for college admissions and govt jobs would resume immediately. "Many recruitment boards kept the process on hold due to the legal confusion. That will now be resolved," Banerjee had said, adding, "Backwardness, not religion, was the sole criterion in the fresh OBC survey." On Tuesday, Bengal leader of opposition Suvendu Adhikari had alleged that the OBC list was flawed and stemmed from "appeasement politics". He said that there were only 11 Muslim groups out of 66 OBC groups before 2010. Adhikari went on to claim that OBC in Bengal meant 'one-sided beneficiary'. Questioning Adhikari's facts, Trinamool Congress had said in a statement on Tuesday: "Suvendu Adhikari, we all know that 'divide and rule' is the official policy of BJP, and your only agenda for the 2026 elections is to pit Hindus against Muslims. But CM Mamata Banerjee has made it crystal clear that backwardness, not religion, is the sole criterion for OBC status. The new list was prepared with that principle in mind. So stop misleading the people with your lies."