Mihir Desai. File | Image source: Hindu
Mihir Desai, a well-known human rights lawyer, said that all countries that failed to establish protection of interreligious and interreligious couples were despised by the Supreme Court. He refers to the 2018 Shaktivahini judgment of the Apex Court, which directs all states to develop protection measures for such couples, including hotlines, special cells and secure homes.
In an interview HinduMr. Desai stressed the urgent need for a national law to protect individual rights to enter interreligious and integrated marriages. “The vast majority of states do not have mechanisms to protect such couples. In fact, without these mechanisms, they completely violate the Supreme Court order. They are prone to disdain.”
Mr. Desai is parallel to Vishakha’s guidelines on sexual harassment in the workplace and points out that the codification of the law can provide a much-needed legal framework. “If a law is worded and drafted properly, it would be very welcome,” he added, skeptical of the political will of such legislation.
The lawyers spoke in a recent order issued by the Maharashtra government, which lists detailed standard operating procedures (SOPs) to protect interfaith and interracial couples between faiths. The order follows the surveillance of the Mumbai High Court on behalf of a Hindu man and a Muslim woman who were forced to flee to Delhi in 2022 because of their decision to marry.
The couple approached the Mumbai High Court in September 2023 to seek protection and safe housing. After nearly two years of court surveillance lawsuit, the Maharashtra government filed a SOP that meets the court, resulting in the disposal of the petition.
Mr Desai expressed his gratitude to the High Court and noted that the state’s response would not be fulfilled without judicial intervention. “The state government itself will not take action – especially in a political environment of hostile marriage hostility, and focuses on so-called “religious freedom” laws that are effectively designed to curb transformation rather than maintain individual autonomy,” he said.
Systematic patriarchy and social rebound
Reflecting on the broader social landscape, Mr. Desai said: “Even today, marriages between marriages are avoided. Just look at the Marriage column. Not only from the family, but also from the community forces of all religions, there is a strong resistance to faith marriage.”
He noted that the threats and violence faced by these couples reflect deep-rooted patriarchy and return attitudes. “The idea of adult women having an agency to choose a partner is still hard to accept. That’s how patriarchy works in India,” he said.
Active national intervention is required
Mr. Desai also criticized the general unwillingness of the state to take the initiative to defend individuals’ basic right to choose a life partner. “The state needs to intervene – even if it means facing social pressure in order to safeguard the rule of law and constitutional rights,” he said.
Shaktivahini’s verdict, which was made in the context of caste-based violence in Haryana and Khap Panchayats, recognized that interfaith couples also faced significant threats across the country. The Supreme Court’s guidance in 2018 requires: (1) a helpline for reporting threats and seeking immediate assistance, (2) a special cell to file a complaint, and (3) a safe home for couples facing the risk of violence.
This week, Maharashtra became one of the few states to formally implement these three components.
publishing – May 17, 2025 at 09:47 pm IST
