Controlling Love Marriages Under The Pretext Of 'Love-Jihad'
Kashyap Joshi
6 March 2026 10:45 AM IST
In 1999, the Supreme Court had said in a famous case of noted writer Githa Hariharan[1] that: mother of a minor cannot be relegated to an inferior position on the ground of sex alone since her right as a natural guardian is equal like a father. It was a case under a Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act of 1956.
After 26 years, recently Bombay High Court[2] has again – while recognising the right of single mother as a 'complete parent' said in a very strong words; acknowledging the rights of single mother is not an act of charity, but it is a constitutional fidelity and faith. This was a case arising out of a rape, where mother had given the birth, but in a settlement arrived between the parties, it was decided that mother will rear the child, custody shall remain with mother only and father (accused) shall have no role as a natural guardian in future. DNA report confirmed the paternity and accused's name came to be reflected as 'father' in the birth certificate and thereafter entered in permeated school and allied documentation. When mother requested to remove father's name, the school authorities refused. Hence, she filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court and the High Court has not only passed the order to remove the name of the father as middle name, but also the surname and mother's name and surname has been ordered to be inserted.
This case reminds us a prevailing mindset of patriarchal society and also a gender bias. Despite there is a considerable rise in the girls education and women empowerment, still many sectors are male dominated and so, authorities working in such fields; the patriarchal compulsion is normal.
For example, recent amendment in Gujarat Registration of Marriage Act, 2006 Rule-3(7) says that – the Assistant Registrar shall send an intimation of such memorandum (of marriage) to the parents of the bride and bridegroom within ten (10) working days by Speed Post.
This will definetely create a hurdle and harm more to the prospective bride (girls) who wish to go for love marriage than the groom. Society is more dominating in respect of making pressure on girls than the boys and after knowing that their daughter is going to marry against the wish of the parents, no parents would allow her to go out or shall try to change her decision, if it is not as per their wish. Hence, this rule itself is a problematic.
In a case of Laxmibai Chandaragi B v. State of Karnataka[3], the Supreme Court has clearly held 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 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”.
Under the pretext of 'Love-Jihad' the executive in Gujarat is trying to control the love marriages because of the pressure of certain communities and this is in fact, not a good sign for Democracy. A male-dominated executive cannot put restriction under the guise of giving information to parents, when society is transforming in the era of artificial intelligence.
The Supreme Court, when categorically held that: the right to marry a person of choice is the integral part of Article-21 of the Constitution, any indirect method to curb the same, would be seen as clear violation of such fundamental right. In fact, the Constitution has guaranteed right to equality as a fundamental right, but even after 75 years, the mindset of the so-called rulers has not changed much.
Even in a famous judgement of Right to Privacy – K S Puttaswamy v. Union of India[, the autonomy of an individual inter alia in relation of family and marriage is also integral to the dignity of the individual. No doubt, this amendment is yet to be tested before the Constitutional Courts, but now it would be very difficult for educated young boys and girls to marry independently after choosing their life partners without fear of parents, if parents are not giving consent. Elders in our society know other methods to convince the youth, who is, according to them out of control.
This amendment in rules of registration in Gujarat is having a chilling effect and words of the Supreme Court in Laxmibai (supra) are seems to be futile, which states: '… if there is a departure from usual norms of the society where caste and community play a major role, even though, consent of parents, family or community is not necessary …'
Here in Gujarat prospective bride and groom have to suffer, for the time being, if the Assistant Registrar inform their choices to the parents. This is almost a bull in China shop for youth, who are getting ready for love marriage without consent of their parents!