An old video from the proceedings in Gwalior High Court in January went viral recently on social media. Justice Rohit Arya of the High Court can be heard asking why a girl converted from Islam to Hinduism. He further asked why can’t the boy convert to Islam instead.
Even though the video is from January 2022, the video came into the social media spotlight at the end of July, and left social media users confused about the Judge’s comments.
Jai Lordship 🙏 pic.twitter.com/6JDmja0mK3
— Mihir Jha (@MihirkJha) July 28, 2022
In the video, the judge can be heard telling the boy’s lawyer that it is not a joke to convert a Muslim girl to Hinduism. He further said that if this is accepted by the court then what will happen to society? The boy, who was in custody, was further advised by the Judge to convert to Islam instead.
Justice Arya said that the boy will go to prison since he has converted the girl to Hinduism by ‘fraud’. He mentioned that they will bring even a Qazi to get his input in the case.
The Muslim girl and the Hindu boy got married at Arya Samaj Sammelan Trust Ghaziabad (UP) on September 17, 2019. The trust had issued a marriage certificate to the couple and had also issued a conversion certificate to them that they have converted to Arya Samajis.
Justice Arya further questioned the legitimacy of that certificate in the viral video and asked the counsel under which act Arya Samaj can issue such a certificate. The court also questioned whether an Arya Samaj Trust could solemnize a marriage between an inter-faith couple.
A sharp contrast to the Supreme Court verdict in the Hadiya case
Back in 2018, the Indian Supreme Court had upheld the marriage of Hadiya to Shafin Jahan after her religious conversion, a marriage that was earlier annulled in 2017 by the Kerala High Court.
Hadiya (who was earlier Akhila) had converted to Islam at the age of 16 to marry Shafin Jahan. Hadiya had submitted an affidavit that she is converting to Islam out of her own free will, a decision that was finally accepted by the Supreme Court.
In its verdict, Supreme Court had noted that when Hadiya appeared before the High Court, she stated that she was not under illegal confinement. The High Court has no power to decide the ‘just’ way of life or ‘correct’ course of living for Hadiya. She has absolute autonomy over her person.
In fact, Supreme Court had also noted that the Kerala High Court was guided by social considerations while annulling her marriage, which was wrong.
Interestingly, in Gwalior High Court, Justice Arya seems to be guided by the same social considerations when he asks what will happen to society if they allow such conversions. Interesting to note that in the case before Gwalior High Court, both boy and girl were above 18 years of age at the time of conversion and marriage. That was not the case when it came to Hadiya, as she was 16 years old at the time of her conversion.
Acceptance of marriage certificates from Islamic bodies but rejection of certificates issued by Arya Samaj
In the Hadiya case, a questionable marriage certificate was produced, and it was claimed that Hadiya and Shafin got married in a ceremony that was attended by close relatives from both sides. However, nobody from Hadiya’s side, not even her parents, were aware of the marriage. Moreover, the Kerala High Court observed that “Thanveerul Islam Sangham”, which issued the marriage certificate has no authority to issue any such certificates.
The court was not even sure of the identity of the names that appeared on that certificate. When Akhila converted to Islam, which doesn’t have any documentary proof, she assumed the name “Aasiya” through an affidavit. Later on, in her writ petitions, she called herself “Akhila Ashokan @ Adhiya”.
Despite all these discrepancies with the marriage certificate and lack of clarity on even the existence of the organisation that issued the certificate, Supreme Court upheld the marriage as legal.
However, in the case in Gwalior High Court, the judge straightaway rejected the idea that Arya Samaj trust can solemnize the marriage. Questioning under which act Arya Samaj can issue a marriage certificate, Justice Arya questioned the legitimacy of the wedding between these two consenting adults.
