Latest news with #AryaSamaj
India.com
a day ago
- Politics
- India.com
Delhi High Court: Adults Have Right To Marry Without Family Interference
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has reaffirmed that the personal liberty of two consenting adults to marry and live together peacefully is protected under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. In a recent ruling, the court emphasised that family opposition cannot override this autonomy. Justice Sanjeev Narula stated that the Supreme Court has consistently upheld this principle, directing law enforcement to protect couples from threats or coercion. In this case, the court ordered police protection for a young couple who feared harassment from the woman's family. The couple had solemnised their marriage on July 23, 2025, following Hindu rituals at an Arya Samaj trust in Delhi. They approached the court after the woman's parents allegedly tried to pressure her, despite her voluntary departure from her family home and her clear affirmation of the marriage during a police inquiry. That inquiry, initiated after a "missing" complaint, was later closed. To ensure their safety, the court instructed the local Station House Officer (SHO) to assign a beat officer, brief them on the court's directives, and provide the couple with emergency contact numbers. Any reported threats must be documented and addressed without delay. Justice Narula clarified that the court was not ruling on the veracity of the allegations but was solely focused on protecting the couple's fundamental rights to life, liberty, and dignity.
Scroll.in
03-08-2025
- Scroll.in
‘A Glimpse of My Life' by Ram Prasad Bismil: A moving autobiography of a young revolutionary
Ram Prasad Bismil's life was devoid of any glory or achievement. He was an idealist who dreamt of freeing his country from the British. He sincerely believed that through acts of violence and killing, they would strike terror in the hearts of the British bureaucracy. That their acts of courage and sacrifice would also inspire the youth of the country to take up cudgels against the British. His was a brief life, which was tragically cut short in 1927 when, at the age of 30, he was hanged for his involvement in the Kakori dacoity case. The moment of his death would have been a moment of both satisfaction and dejection for him. He would have been gratified for having made the supreme sacrifice of his life for a cause that was so dear to him. But he was also much less than certain whether his sacrifice had brought the cause of India's freedom any closer to fulfilment. Such was his lot, and of many others of his generation who thought and believed like him. The importance of Bismil's life lies not so much in what he achieved but in his ideals and the sincerity with which he pursued them. When in jail, Bismil started writing about his life on scattered scraps of paper that were available to him. They were surreptitiously smuggled out and printed after Bismil was hanged. These have now been translated admirably and competently into English by Awadhesh Tripathi as A Glimpse of My Life, thus making them accessible to a wider readership. A life of revolt Bismil lived during the first three decades of the 20th century, when the ideas of anti-imperialist Indian nationalism had begun to break out of the ivory towers of Indian politics, located in the metropolitan cities, and had spread out to small cities and towns. Stories of the Swadeshi movement had begun to reach people through newspapers. Ideas of Indian nationalism were being transmitted to remote areas and, in the process, getting transformed. People's experiences of discontent with British rule were now finding a new articulation. It was in this climate that Bismil grew as a young teenager in Shahjahanpur, a small city in UP. Quite unlike many other nationalist leaders, Bismil grew up in a completely locked and insular zone, where he had no exposure to modern ideas of liberalism and secularism. His social environment was remarkably devoid of broad external influences. The one major source of inspiration for him was the Arya Samaj. Very early in his life, Bismil transcended the narrow world of self-interest and aspired to a life of service to larger causes. This major shift was informed by three major influences: traditions and family socialisation, anti-imperialist nationalism that had reached the interiors of Indian society, and the Arya Samaj. These influences created a personality that was both unique and complex. His personal life was deeply conservative, in which he nurtured ideas of austerity and celibacy. He attached great value to Brahmacharya, which to him was the fountainhead of all virtues. As he grew older and came under the influence of Arya Samaj, he worked towards Shuddhi, a purificatory movement geared towards re-converting Muslims back to Hinduism. The Shuddhi movement was generally anti-Muslim and ridden with communal overtones. But his involvement with Shuddhi did not come in the way of a deep emotional bonding with Ashfaqullah Khan, his fellow revolutionary who was involved in the Kakori train dacoity and eventually hanged along with him. His memoirs are full of very fond and moving references to his soulmate Ashfaqullah Khan, and through him, to the supreme necessity of Hindu-Muslim unity. Bismil's social universe was very Gandhian, even though he did not come directly under Gandhi's influence and may not have been aware of it. It is also possible that his social ideas were inspired by sources other than Gandhi. But the Gandhian stamp on his social ideas is quite unmistakable. Bismil's idea of a viable economy was that of a decentralised village economy, in which villages would be able to sustain themselves without depending on outside forces for their needs. Also, he wanted villagers to grow as 'true khadi-wearing, swadeshi patriots' who would read and write and 'subscribe to newspapers so that they keep themselves informed of what is happening in the country'. This sounds so remarkably similar to Gandhi's imagination of an ideal Indian village. However, his political universe could not have been more distant from Gandhi's. Bismil's political world was marked by guns, bombs, and killing. The politics of underground violence required money. Therefore, a train carrying the government treasury had to be looted. It was for this offence that he was caught and hanged. For most of his life, he was convinced that these acts of violence would strike terror in the British officials and bureaucrats and would thus help to liberate the country. However, such politics had its pitfalls. There was just no support, financial or political, from society. The extremely efficient intelligence network of the British enabled them to catch all those involved in the Kakori dacoity. Some of the efficiency of the British network stemmed from the fact that a number of Indians were ready to collaborate with the government and provide information about the revolutionaries. Often, factional fights among them let out their secrets. Many practitioners of underground violence turned approvers after being arrested. Both the factors – fear of torture by the police and the incentives offered – were at work. This was the inevitable fate of all such clandestine, secretly held, underground violent activities. Quite often, common people were also suspicious of them. Bismil was aware of these pitfalls, yet remained committed to the politics of underground violence till a few months before the end of his life. His personal, social, and political trajectories flowed in very different directions. One was not a derivative of the other and existed quite independently of the other. On death row After Bismil was arrested, he was found guilty and given a death sentence. The two moments – awareness of the impending death and the actual death – were separated by three months. Bismil spent these three months in deep introspection. His last note in the memoirs is just three days before the hanging. It was during this period that he began to question the efficacy of violent methods. He realised that the route to effective politics lay through educating and mobilising the masses and not through violence and killing: '… if we had directed our efforts towards educating the masses and spreading awareness among them, our actions might have been more successful and more lasting'. The following were his thoughts during the last moments of his life: 'I am now convinced that no revolutionary organisation can be successful in India … as the conditions are not conducive for revolution. That is why it is foolish to attract the country's youth to revolutionary work and ruin their lives in the process. It is likely to do more harm than good. My final message to the youth is that they should choose to serve the nation sincerely instead of entertaining the romantic idea of using revolvers or pistols'. Bismil's short life of 30 years was rich, unique, and in keeping with the highest ethical standards. When in jail, there were moments of opportunity for him in which he could have escaped. But he chose not to escape as it would have put the careers of the policemen at risk of removal. He lived his life selflessly and acted out his ideological commitments. His memoirs give us an ample reflection of his life and ideas. Awadhesh Tripathi has done well to make this world available to readers of the English language. Salil Misra is a visiting faculty member at the BM Munjal University, Manesar.
Mint
03-08-2025
- Politics
- Mint
Sita Devi of Baroda: The 'maharani' who never was
On 6 November 1943, Meka Rangaiah Appa Rao—zamindar of Vuyyuru in today's Andhra Pradesh—received a letter from his wife of ten years. It was a short paragraph, probably worded by a lawyer, and carried important news. 'I have become a Moslem," the lady announced, and taken the name Sheherazade. But the crux of the matter was this: 'in order that our relationship of husband and wife might continue," she wished for Appa Rao to follow her into the new faith. When the man said no thank you, Sheherazade moved the city courts to pronounce their union invalid—a wish that was granted by Christmas Eve. With that she terminated a marriage she declared had always been unhappy. But then there was a twist, or in a colonial official's words, a 'first class scandal". For it suddenly dawned upon Sheherazade, who only days ago proclaimed to a judge that she did not 'like the Hindu faith", that she did, in fact, like it. Making use of Arya Samaj rituals, she reconverted to her ancestral religion, retired her Muslim name, and on 31 December at 9pm acquired a fresh (Hindu) husband. Her conviction in Islam had lasted under three months; the moment her divorce was confirmed, Sheherazade became, once again, Sita Devi, princess of Pithapuram. The marriage of Pratap Singh Rao Gaekwad, maharaja of Baroda, and Sita Devi was one of princely India's most entertaining—but also legally complicated—episodes, sparking all species of bureaucratic nightmares and the loss of some tremendous jewels. Things looked unpromising from the start, what with the bride's father denouncing her. Sita Devi was the daughter of Surya Rao of Pithapuram, a princely patron of the Telugu language. In a press statement, he expressed 'unqualified condemnation" of his daughter, noting the 'grief and horror" caused by her 'outrageous abuse" of Islam and Hinduism to discard a husband. Many nostrils flared in indignation also at the thought of her nine-year-old son. Of course, her new husband was resoundingly criticised too: as the British representative in Baroda noted, the maharaja had breached his own state's monogamy laws, betrayed its tradition of progressive rule, and public sympathy was unequivocally with his wife, Shanta Devi—the mother of eight children. Though 'greatly shocked", her willingness to 'acquiesce patiently in anything which contributes to her husband's happiness" only made him look worse. It was not as if Indian princes had not taken multiple wives before—one maharaja is said to have been ribbed as 'His Exhausted Highness" because of his numerous romantic conquests. But Pratap Singh's grandfather, Sayaji Rao Gaekwad, had been famous for his modernity, enlightened public policy, monogamy (though he did allegedly have the odd extramarital affair) and for taking Baroda to the top ranks of Indian states. As a result, the people of Baroda, who prided themselves 'on being in advance of (their) neighbours", felt Pratap Singh had let them down. His defence that the Baroda Hindu Monogamy Act—which he himself had passed into law in 1942—applied only to his subjects, not to him, was preposterous. In truth, he simply did not expect the backlash. In February 1944 the British noted how the maharaja was under the impression that 'everyone would (simply) accept his right to marry when and where he liked". On being proved wrong, he maintained an air of defiance, but in private, 'His Highness' conscience is not altogether easy." It probably didn't help that his lively private affairs allowed the Indian National Congress to slam the maharaja politically as well. But neither Sita Devi nor her second husband was easily defeated. A desperate campaign was launched to win support. For one, the maharaja began to collect letters of approval from other princes like the rulers of Indore and Gwalior to demonstrate, that 'from the Maratha point of view" at least, the marriage was 'perfectly in order". Baroda law too was amended to resolve the maharaja's polygamous conundrum retrospectively. Backing for Pratap Singh arrived from one or two unexpected quarters: the Baroda State Muslim League, and V.D. Savarkar of the Hindu Mahasabha. In the latter's case, it was not so much approval of the union that led to support as fear that the scandal might become an excuse to topple a leading Hindu prince and prove 'extremely harmful to…Hindu interests". Pratap Singh also stockpiled a set of favourable legal opinions, including from stalwarts like Chimanlal Setalvad. But the situation remained hopeless: the British considered the marriage a 'fraud upon the law". The advocate general pronounced its legitimacy 'doubtful", while another top viceregal adviser argued that applying the term 'marriage" to the case was a stretch. What made things worse was blows at home. The maharaja's own minister, the celebrated V.T. Krishnamachari, baulked at the thought of kowtowing to Sita Devi. Like her father, he was horrified by the conversion charade and her first husband's ejection. So, after over 16 years of service, Krishnamachari packed his bags and left. Shanta Devi, meanwhile, although she never openly criticised her husband, was said to be in favour of withholding recognition. The idea was that these complications would cool the maharaja's 'infatuation", and that Sita Devi could be 'discreetly pensioned off". Indeed, Sita Devi was never acknowledged as either a 'Highness" or a maharani—the best the British establishment could offer in a 1945 passport was a watered down 'Lady Sita Devi". But Pratap Singh would not give up trying; with the British set to depart, he began to lobby Congress politicians. His new minister, B.L. Mitter, for example, attempted to persuade Sardar Patel in 1947 to let Sita Devi use the title of maharani, albeit without 'Her Highness" prefixed, or 'of Baroda" suffixed. She would be the maharani of nowhere, but at least a maharani of some variety. The request fell flat again. Predictably, given the age in which they lived, the couple faced a social boycott. Honeymooning in Kashmir in 1944, they found that while the state's ruler would receive Pratap Singh as a fellow maharaja, his queen refused to entertain Sita Devi. Sita Devi was forever tarnished as a 'bad" sort of woman, with an 'unsavoury past". Or as a home ministry official would put it in 1957, Sita Devi was 'a modern Cleopatra who has debauched the mind and body and caused the complete ruin of Maharaja Pratapsinh Gaekwar of Baroda." There is, of course, a whiff of sexism here, not least because Pratap Singh was hardly the ideal man or prince before Sita Devi erupted on to the scene. Indeed, at the time of their marriage it seemed already clear that he was unable to fill his illustrious grandfather's shoes. The general consolation had been that he was at least a 'model husband and father". But the moment he got handsy with a married woman, he forfeited that distinction too. If anything, official support remained firmly with Shanta Devi, who is described in the files as embodying 'the true spirit of a Hindu Dharmapathni". In the end, things doddered to an expensive anti-climax. When the princely states acceded to the Indian Union in 1947, Pratap Singh was among the first to join. But as Sita Devi's brother noted, he was a 'foolish person, and a dangerously foolish one at that." Thus, when Junagadh opted for Pakistan instead of India, creating a crisis for the government, the maharaja was asked to help maintain law and order in the region. Doing so would have won him favour—perhaps even recognition for his 'lady". But instead, he demanded that six Indian territories abutting Baroda first be handed to him (for historical reasons), and he be recognised as 'King of Gujarat and Kathiawar"; in this position, he would assist India as a 'faithful ally". Sardar Patel never forgave Pratap Singh: 'You bargained about your own position at a time when India was in difficulties." Later it was discovered that the maharaja had been pocketing crores of rupees—including from a fund his grandfather founded to back big infrastructure projects. In 1951, after he launched an ill-fated campaign for the resurrection of royal rule, including by collaborating with certain princes who had flirted with Pakistan, Pratap Singh was deposed. Sita Devi, too, was accumulating fresh layers of infamy. It appears she had been merrily taking jewels from Baroda's vaults, and when some pieces were returned under strict orders from Delhi, parts were missing. In 1955 there was furious chatter in official circles after Pratap Singh's son asked for assistance in recovering treasures she had shipped abroad. Some items were said to be in Europe, others in the custody of the American jeweller Harry Winston. The value of Sita Devi's hoard can be estimated from the fact that a single artefact that vanished from Baroda—a canopy with 950,000 Basra pearls, emeralds, rubies, etc.—was auctioned in 2019 for over $2 million. In 1956 India's deputy home secretary complained that 'Lady Sita Devi" had no right to these articles, especially after her husband was dismissed from his post. Yet, 'in spite of all efforts she did not return the jewellery to the present Ruler of Baroda". A partial list of valuables in her custody shows that she possessed everything from strands of the famous Baroda pearl necklace to milk jugs, coffee pots, and even a strainer made of gold. The sale of these pieces kept Sita Devi afloat for the rest of her days. She certainly needed the cash. For after all the drama of their marriage, in 1956 Pratap Singh and Sita Devi divorced (no high-speed religious conversion was needed this time). She moved abroad, posing among society elites as Baroda's maharani, managing to even get this entered briefly into a British passport. That same year, learning that she had also obtained a diplomatic visa for the US (allowing her to deposit jewels there, uninspected by customs), India informed the Americans that this was a grave mistake. In 1957, Sita Devi was seen at an official event in Colombo, where the Indian high commissioner noticed her in a 'place of honour…with Chou En-Lai to her right and Mrs Bandaranaike to her left". She was presented as a 'Highness", and when the diplomat came face to face with her, she was 'cold and unfriendly". Apparently, Sita Devi—who doesn't appear to have returned to India again—was aware she was out of favour for 'having smuggled out the Baroda State jewels worth several million pounds." In the end, still living off the Baroda treasures, she settled in Paris, dying in the 1980s. In all the files around the saga of 'Lady Sita Devi" and Pratap Singh, her own voice is absent. It is difficult to determine how she might have defended herself—the divorce stunt in 1943, her remarriage, and the question of an 'unrecognised" woman's claim to the dynastic riches of her second ex-husband. To the British, she posed a unique kind of difficulty. Typically, it was when maharajas married white women that they confronted problems around recognition and titles. Sita Devi's case was a rare occasion when a brown woman marrying a brown man caused a scandal. To Indian babus, she looked venal and treacherous, the opposite of the forbearing wife they saw in Shanta Devi. In any case, Sita Devi, for all the wealth she acquired, ultimately had a gloomy end: her son with Pratap Singh, 'Princie", killed himself a few years before her death. There is, though, a strange victory she enjoys in her afterlife. All her goods—from art to jewels and furniture—ended up in alien hands, appearing in auction catalogues across the world. But in what might have pleased our queen-who-never-was—and left her critics incandescent—these brochures uniformly style her as Sita Devi, maharani of Baroda. Manu S. Pillai is a historian and author, most recently, of Gods, Guns and Missionaries.
News18
02-08-2025
- Politics
- News18
Legality & Loopholes: Why Arya Samaj Marriages Are Facing Court Heat
Last Updated: Arya Samaj marriages offer a quick route for interfaith and inter-caste couples, but rising misuse by fake groups is triggering legal and social scrutiny. The Allahabad High Court on July 28 directed the Uttar Pradesh government to investigate the functioning of 'fake Arya Samaj societies" allegedly involved in conducting illegal marriages across the state. The directive came from a single-judge bench while hearing a plea by a man named Sonu, who is accused of abducting and sexually assaulting a minor girl from a different faith. He told the court that he had later married the girl at an Arya Samaj Mandir. Sonu claimed the two had married in an Arya Samaj Mandir in Prayagraj a day before the complaint was filed and that the girl later chose to live with him after becoming an adult. The court, however, found that the girl was a minor at the time of the alleged marriage, and that no valid religious conversion had taken place between the interfaith couple as required under the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. The court also noted the marriage certificate issued by the Arya Samaj was unregistered and possibly fabricated. The case has reignited debate around the legality of marriages conducted by Arya Samaj and the role these societies play in solemnising such unions. The court also highlighted concerns over the growing number of marriages facilitated by these organisations—many of which, it noted, may be operating as 'fake" Arya Samaj societies. Founded by Swami Dayanand Saraswati in 1875, the Arya Samaj began as a Hindu reform movement focused on reviving Vedic values. It gained significant influence in northern India, especially in regions like Punjab (now divided between India and Pakistan), during the late 19th century. One of the defining features of the Arya Samaj was its introduction of 'Shuddhi', or purification, which aimed to bring individuals from other faiths or ideologies into its vision of Vedic, monotheistic Hinduism. The Arya Samaj took a progressive stance on inter-caste and interfaith marriages. Before the Special Marriage Act (SMA), 1954, came into effect, it offered one of the few ways for Hindus to marry outside their caste or faith while still retaining their caste identity. To remove any ambiguity around the legality of such unions, the Arya Marriage Validation Act was enacted in 1937. This law formally recognised marriages conducted according to Arya Samaj rituals. These weddings follow a simplified set of Hindu ceremonies and require only that the couple is of legal age and identifies as Arya Samajis—regardless of caste or prior religious affiliation. The 1937 Act clearly states that Arya Samaj marriages cannot be considered invalid just because the individuals belong to different castes or were from another religion before the marriage. Why Do Couples Prefer Arya Samaj Weddings? The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955—which governs Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs—recognises marriages performed by the Arya Samaj. People from other religions can also marry under this system, provided they declare themselves members of the Arya Samaj. Many Arya Samaj temples are known to perform this conversion quickly, making the entire marriage process efficient. With minimal formalities, no lengthy waiting periods, and swift documentation, these ceremonies can be completed within a couple of hours. This convenience is particularly appealing to couples in love who face opposition from families or communities due to differences in caste or religion. While interfaith couples can also marry under the Special Marriage Act, it requires a 30-day public notice before the wedding, a step that can expose them to pressure or threats from family members or authorities. In contrast, Arya Samaj weddings offer a more private and faster alternative. How Do Fake Arya Samaj Societies Operate? While Arya Samaj marriages offer a quick and accessible option for couples facing barriers due to caste, religion, or social pressure, a growing number of fake organisations operating under the Arya Samaj name have emerged. These unauthorised groups often conduct marriages without proper checks, forged documents, and in some cases, even solemnise the weddings of underage brides. Why Are Authorities Cracking Down On Arya Samaj Marriages? A key legal question—whether Arya Samaj marriages should follow the procedures laid out in the Special Marriage Act—has been pending before the Supreme Court since 2022. Several states have passed stringent anti-conversion laws, which have led multiple High Courts to question the legality of Arya Samaj marriages, particularly those involving religious conversion. For example, under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, Section 6 voids any marriage that involves an improper or unauthorised religious conversion. Sections 8 and 9 require a formal declaration 60 days before conversion and another after the conversion, both of which must be submitted to the District Magistrate. The authorities are also required to verify that the conversion is voluntary and lawful. Section 12 of the Act shifts the burden of proof to the accused, who must prove that the conversion, and by extension, the marriage, was not carried out through coercion or fraud. This legal presumption renders many such marriages invalid by default. As a result, Arya Samaj weddings, especially those involving 'Shuddhi' before interfaith marriages, are increasingly seen as incompatible with these legal requirements. Courts have flagged concerns that many Arya Samaj organisations are solemnising marriages without ensuring legal conversions or verifying the couple's eligibility. top videos View all Over the years, there have been several cases where High Courts have directed police to investigate such marriages, citing reports of forged documents, underage brides or grooms, and conversions done without proper procedure. In 2022, the Supreme Court remarked orally that the Arya Samaj had 'no business" issuing marriage certificates. Similarly, in 2023, the Delhi High Court instructed an Arya Samaj temple to ensure the authenticity of witnesses and couples before performing ceremonies. About the Author Surbhi Pathak Surbhi Pathak, subeditor, writes on India, world affairs, science, and education. She is currently dabbling with lifestyle content. Follow her on X: @S_Pathak_11. Get Latest Updates on Movies, Breaking News On India, World, Live Cricket Scores, And Stock Market Updates. Also Download the News18 App to stay updated! tags : Arya Samaj hindu marriage act view comments Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: August 02, 2025, 11:24 IST News explainers Legality & Loopholes: Why Arya Samaj Marriages Are Facing Court Heat Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Indian Express
02-08-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Why Arya Samaj marriages are under the scanner of courts
Also by Vineet Bhalla The Allahabad High Court last week directed the Uttar Pradesh government to investigate how 'fake Arya Samaj Societies' that solemnise marriages without verifying the age of the bride and the groom, and in violation of the state's anti-conversion law, 'have flourished throughout the State'. While hearing a case in which a Muslim man is accused of kidnapping, forcibly marrying, and committing statutory rape on a minor Hindu girl, Justice Prashant Kumar said that many marriages in the state, including those officiated by the Arya Samaj, bypass mandatory procedures under the UP anti-conversion law and marriage registration rules. The accused had claimed to have got married at an Arya Samaj temple. The Allahabad HC's directives are the latest in a series of judicial orders that have called for a scrutiny of marriages solemnised by the Arya Samaj. Such weddings are granted legal sanction under the 88-year-old Arya Marriage Validation Act. The Arya Samaj was formally established by Swami Dayanand Saraswati in 1875 as a Hindu revivalist movement. It gained prominence in northern India, especially Punjab (including present-day Pakistan), in the late 19th century. Among other things, the Arya Samaj made the very first attempts to convert persons from other faiths or ideologies to its version of Vedic, monotheistic Hinduism through a process it called 'shuddhi' (purification). One of the ways it facilitated this was by having a progressive view of inter-caste and even interfaith marriages. In effect, till the Special Marriage Act, 1954 came into force, the Arya Samaj provided the only way for a Hindu to marry out of caste or religion and to still retain their caste. In 1937, the Arya Marriage Validation Act was passed to 'remove doubts' and recognise the validity of Arya Samaj marriages. These weddings take place as per a specific set of Hindu rituals, but only require the bride and groom to be of marriageable age and declare themselves to be Arya Samajis — regardless of their caste or religion. The 1937 law states: 'Notwithstanding any provision of Hindu Law, usage or custom to the contrary, no marriage contracted whether before or after the commencement of this Act between two persons being at the time of the marriage Arya Samajists shall be invalid or shall be deemed over to have been invalid by reason only of the fact that the parties at any time belonged to different castes or different sub-castes of Hindus or that either or both of the parties at any time before the marriage belonged to a religion other than Hinduism.' The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — which covers not just Hindus but also Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs — recognises Arya Samaj marriages. Those belonging to other religions simply need to convert to Hinduism before the wedding. However, several Arya Samaj organisations complete this conversion ritual expeditiously. This means that Arya Samaj weddings are fast, often not taking more than a couple of hours. This, along with the ease of paperwork and relaxed requirements, make Arya Samaj weddings popular among eloping or runaway couples, who often belong to different castes or religions. Interfaith couples also have the option to marry under the SMA, which allows marriage without the couple having to give up their faith. However, under the SMA, couples must give a 30-day public notice before they marry, leaving them vulnerable to harassment from their families or the authorities. A petition on whether Arya Samaj marriages must comply with the requirements of the Special Marriage Act has been pending before the Supreme Court since 2022. However, since a number of BJP-ruled states have passed stringent anti-conversion laws over the last 10 years, several HCs have raised questions on the validity of Arya Samaj marriages. This is because the anti-conversion laws bar alternative legal processes for marriage involving religious conversion. For instance, in Uttar Pradesh, Section 6 of the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 renders void any marriage that is preceded by an unlawful or procedurally non-compliant religious conversion. Sections 8 and 9 of the law require both a pre-conversion declaration 60 days before marriage and a post-conversion declaration within a specified timeframe to the district magistrate. The law also mandates an inquiry to verify the voluntariness and legality of the conversion process. Section 12 of the Act places the burden of proof on an accused to demonstrate that their spouse's consent for conversion was not obtained illegally. The default legal assumption, thus, is that marriages through conversion are illegal and non-consensual. This puts Arya Samaj marriages at odds with the UP anti-conversion law. The shuddhi performed before most interfaith Arya Samaj marriages does not comply with the onerous process for conversion prescribed in the anti-conversion law. Courts have, over the last few years, expressed concern over the mass-scale solemnisation of marriages by Arya Samaj organisations without sticking to lawful conversion practices or verifying marriage eligibility conditions. The Allahabad HC and Madhya Pradesh HC have ordered police investigations into instances where these organisations allegedly married minors using forged documents, and facilitated conversions without following procedures mandated by the anti-conversion laws of these states. In 2022, the Supreme Court orally observed that the Arya Samaj has 'no business' issuing marriage certificates, while the Delhi High Court last year directed an Arya Samaj temple to use verified witnesses to ensure that marriages performed by the temple were genuine. Justice Kumar referred to one such judgment by the Allahabad HC from May in his order on Thursday. He observed that the marriage between the Muslim man and the Hindu girl would be invalid because the girl was a minor and the man did not convert as per the UP anti-conversion law.
