'Expelling Members For Marrying Outside Community Violates Article 25' : Kerala Court Dismisses Knanaya Church's Appeals

The Court of the Additional District Judge - V, Kottayam on an appeal before it from the judgment of the Additional Sub Court, Kottayam, held that endogamy within the Knanaya Catholic Community is not an essential religious practice and on this basis, the expulsion of the Knanaya Catholic member and their family unit permanently from the Church for marrying outside the community is violative of Article 25 of the Constitution of India. In the Judgment delivered by the Additional District Judge-V, Sanu S. Panicker, while holding so, observed, "..I am of the view that endogamy is nothing but a marriage custom prevailing in the community, which is not an essential religious practice for limiting the membership of the Church, and as such, I am of the view that the Church would not be justified in regulating the membership of the Church on the basis of the custom of endogamy prevailing in the community". The Knanaya Church is a sect of Syro-Malabar Catholic Church. The Knanaya community takes distinct pride in their ancestral heritage, which they trace back to Syrian Christians who are believed to have migrated from South Mesopotamia to Kerala during the 4th century. They distinguish themselves from other Catholics on account of their unique lineage and rigorously follow endogamy, and violation of it will lead to expulsion from the community, even if the person married is a Catholic of another church.As per the factual circumstances of the case, a suit had been instituted in 2015 by the Knanaya Catholic Naveekarana Samithy and certain members of the community challenging the practice of expelling members of the community for marrying a Catholic of another church on the ground that the same is 'unholy', 'unconstitutional', 'unethical' and 'inhuman', before the Additional Sub Judge, Kottayam. The suit was thus instituted seeking a declaration that the practice of endogamy was unconstitutional and illegal. Directions were also sought to bring back members expelled for violating endogmay and to restrain the Kottayam diocese (which is the exclusive diocese of Knanaya Catholics) from following this practice. The Sub Court in this case held that the aforementioned practice of expelling members from the Knanaya Catholic Church for marrying outside the community is unconstitutional for being violative of right to marry under Article 21 and right to religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India, and further held that the practice of compulsive endogamy in the church was in violation of right to marriage, which is a facet of right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court had added that such a practice of compulsive endogamy was violative of the Bible, Canon Laws, Particular Laws, Article of faith, Indian Constitution and International Covenants. It is against this judgment that the appeal had been filed before the Additional District Judge - V, Kottayam. Upon considering the question as to whether the custom of endogamy was a valid one, it was contended by the counsels for the appellants, Advocates P.B. Krishnan and Agi Joseph, that the said custom had been followed for centuries. The Sub-Court was unable to find merit in this contention, since no sufficient evidence to prove the same had been established by the appellants. However, in the instant case, the Court found that, "the custom of endogamy is being followed by the community, reasonably a very long period, without any break, and therefore, there is no justification in holding that the defendants have failed to establish the custom of endogamy". In this light, the Court found that the Court below had wrongly admitted an article published by a third party as evidence that the founder Thomas Knani had married a Hindu lady and had children out of wedlock as a ground to establish that the custom of endogamy had not been practiced for centuries. The Court further found that as per the Canon Law, Canon 6(2) and 1509, a custom for more than 100 years is "liable to be accepted as a valid custom even if it violates some canon principles".Importantly, the Court observed that, "...endogamy is a marriage custom prevailing in the community attached to the Church, and it does not take away the right of any member of the community attached to the Church for choosing a life partner of their own choice, and therefore, the "right of marriage" "as such" is not restrained by endogamy". It further added that, "..the custom of endogamy is intended to preserve the culture and purity of the community, and as such, they have every right to preserve it under Article 29 of the Constitution of India within their community". To this extent, the finding of the Court below that endogamy violates Article 21 of the Constitution was overturned by the Court on stating that, "...the custom of endogamy is a valid custom among the community and it never violates Article 21 of the Constitution as contended by the learned counsels for the appellants and supporting respondents,...

'Expelling Members For Marrying Outside Community Violates Article 25' : Kerala Court Dismisses Knanaya Church's Appeals

Navya Benny

Enforcing Endgomay is not an essential religious practice, the court ruled.

Tags