24 Feb 2026·Source: The Hindu

4 min

Polity & GovernanceSocial IssuesNEWS

Allahabad HC: Interfaith Marriages Permitted Under New UP Conversion Law

Q: If a Mains question asks me to 'Critically examine the Allahabad HC ruling,' what opposing viewpoints should I include?

You should include the following opposing viewpoints: * Individual Liberty vs. Societal Concerns: Acknowledge the court's emphasis on individual freedom and privacy but also discuss concerns about potential exploitation of vulnerable individuals through forced conversions. * State's Role: The state's argument that it has a duty to prevent unlawful conversions should be presented, even while highlighting the court's rejection of that argument in this specific case. * Potential Misuse of Freedom: Briefly address the concern that the freedom to convert could be misused for ulterior motives, even if the court didn't find evidence of that here. Key points: Individual Liberty vs. Societal Concerns: Acknowledge the court's emphasis on individual freedom and privacy but also discuss concerns about potential exploitation of vulnerable individuals through forced conversions.. State's Role: The state's argument that it has a duty to prevent unlawful conversions should be presented, even while highlighting the court's rejection of that argument in this specific case.. Potential Misuse of Freedom: Briefly address the concern that the freedom to convert could be misused for ulterior motives, even if the court didn't find evidence of that here. Exam tip: Always present a balanced view in 'Critically examine' questions. Acknowledge the strengths and weaknesses of both sides of the argument.

Allahabad HC protects interfaith couples, clarifying that the anti-conversion law doesn't prohibit interfaith marriages.

The Allahabad High Court has affirmed that Uttar Pradesh's anti-conversion law does not prohibit interfaith marriages. The court provided police protection to 12 interfaith couples, emphasizing their right to privacy and liberty. The court clarified that the anti-conversion law applies only when conversion occurs through misrepresentation, force, or coercion. The state argued that the couples did not comply with certain sections of the conversion law, but the court rejected this argument, upholding individual choice and constitutional rights.

This ruling underscores the judiciary's role in safeguarding personal freedoms and interpreting laws in a manner consistent with constitutional principles. The court's decision to provide police protection further highlights its commitment to ensuring the safety and security of individuals exercising their fundamental rights.

This news is relevant for understanding the intersection of personal laws, constitutional rights, and state legislation in India, particularly concerning freedom of religion and marriage. It is highly relevant for UPSC exams, especially in Polity & Governance sections (GS Paper II).

Key Facts

Allahabad High Court allowed police protection to 12 interfaith couples.

The court stated that the anti-conversion law applies only when conversion occurs through misrepresentation, force, or coercion.

The court emphasized that interfaith marriages are not prohibited under the anti-conversion law.

The court observed that the state has a duty to protect the life and liberty of every citizen, regardless of religious belief.

UPSC Exam Angles

GS Paper II (Polity & Governance): Fundamental Rights, Constitutional Provisions, Judicial Review

Understanding the interplay between personal laws and constitutional rights

Potential essay topics on freedom of religion and the role of the judiciary

In Simple Words

The court said that if two adults want to live together, even if they're from different religions, the government can't stop them unless there's forced conversion. Basically, it's their choice who they live with. The court is protecting their freedom.

India Angle

In India, people often face pressure from family or society about who they marry or live with, especially if they're from different religions. This ruling says that the government should protect couples who choose to live together, regardless of their religion.

For Instance

Imagine a young couple from different religious backgrounds wants to rent an apartment. Some landlords might refuse them. This court ruling reinforces their right to live together without discrimination.

This decision matters because it protects your right to choose your partner and live your life as you want, without unnecessary interference from the government or others.

Your life, your choice: Interfaith couples have the right to live together peacefully.

The Allahabad High Court stated that Uttar Pradesh's anti-conversion law doesn't prohibit interfaith marriages. The court provided police protection to 12 interfaith couples, emphasizing their right to privacy and liberty.

The court clarified that the anti-conversion law applies only when conversion occurs through misrepresentation, force, or coercion. The state argued the couples didn't comply with conversion law sections, but the court rejected this, upholding individual choice and constitutional rights.

Expert Analysis

The Allahabad High Court's stance on interfaith marriages and the Uttar Pradesh anti-conversion law brings several key legal and constitutional concepts into focus.

The Right to Privacy, declared a fundamental right by the Supreme Court in the landmark case of *Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs. Union of India* (2017), is central to this issue. The Allahabad High Court's emphasis on protecting interfaith couples underscores the idea that individuals have the autonomy to make personal choices, including whom to marry, without undue interference from the state. This right is intrinsic to Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the protection of life and personal liberty. The court's decision to provide police protection to these couples directly reflects the state's duty to safeguard this fundamental right against potential threats arising from societal disapproval or unlawful actions.

Another crucial concept is Article 25 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion. While this right is not absolute and is subject to public order, morality, health, and other provisions, it forms the bedrock of religious freedom in India. The Uttar Pradesh anti-conversion law, officially known as the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, seeks to regulate religious conversions, but the High Court's interpretation clarifies that it cannot be used to impede genuine interfaith marriages where conversion is not forced or fraudulent. The court's stance reinforces the idea that individuals have the right to choose their religion and marry someone of their choice, as long as it is not based on coercion or misrepresentation.

Finally, the principle of Individual Liberty, enshrined in the Constitution, is at stake. The High Court's rejection of the state's argument that the couples did not comply with certain sections of the conversion law highlights the importance of upholding individual autonomy. The court is essentially saying that the state cannot impose unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles that infringe upon an individual's right to marry someone of their choice. This interpretation aligns with the broader constitutional framework that prioritizes individual freedoms and limits the state's power to interfere in personal matters unless there is a compelling public interest.

For UPSC aspirants, understanding these concepts is crucial for both Prelims and Mains. Questions may arise concerning the scope of fundamental rights, the interpretation of laws affecting personal freedoms, and the balance between individual liberties and state regulation. Familiarity with landmark cases like *Puttaswamy* and a clear understanding of Articles 21 and 25 are essential.

Visual Insights

States with Anti-Conversion Laws (February 2026)

Highlights states with laws similar to the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, which has been the subject of recent Allahabad High Court rulings regarding interfaith marriages.

Loading interactive map...

📍Uttar Pradesh

More Information

Background

The issue of interfaith marriages and religious conversion has a complex history in India. The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion under Article 25, but this right is not absolute and is subject to limitations such as public order, morality, and health. Over the years, various states have enacted laws to regulate religious conversions, often with the stated aim of preventing forced or fraudulent conversions. The Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, is one such law. It requires individuals seeking to convert to another religion to obtain prior permission from the district magistrate. The law also makes religious conversions for the sole purpose of marriage illegal. This law has been challenged in courts on the grounds that it violates fundamental rights, including the right to privacy and freedom of religion. The Allahabad High Court's recent ruling is significant because it clarifies the scope and applicability of this law, particularly in the context of interfaith marriages. The judiciary's role in interpreting laws related to religious freedom and personal liberty is crucial in a diverse country like India. The courts have consistently upheld the principle of individual choice and autonomy in matters of marriage and religion, while also recognizing the state's power to regulate activities that may disrupt public order or violate constitutional principles.

Latest Developments

In recent years, several states have enacted or amended laws related to religious conversion, reflecting a growing concern over the issue of forced conversions. These laws often include provisions that require individuals seeking to convert to obtain prior approval from the government or face criminal penalties. The constitutional validity of these laws has been challenged in various High Courts and the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has also been hearing petitions challenging the validity of anti-conversion laws. The court has expressed concerns about the potential misuse of these laws and their impact on individual freedoms. It has also emphasized the need to maintain a balance between the state's power to regulate religious conversions and the individual's right to choose their religion freely. Looking ahead, it is expected that the legal challenges to anti-conversion laws will continue to be heard in the courts. The Supreme Court's eventual ruling on the matter will have significant implications for the interpretation of Article 25 of the Constitution and the balance between religious freedom and state regulation in India.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Why is the Allahabad High Court's stance on interfaith marriages under the UP anti-conversion law considered 'HIGH' importance for UPSC?

This ruling is significant because it directly relates to fundamental rights such as freedom of religion (Article 25), right to privacy, and individual liberty, all of which are crucial for UPSC Polity & Governance questions. The judiciary's interpretation of laws affecting these rights is a recurring theme in UPSC.

Exam Tip

Focus on understanding the interplay between fundamental rights and state laws restricting them. UPSC often frames questions around the balance between individual freedoms and societal concerns.

2. The news mentions Article 25 and Right to Privacy. What's the MOST direct way the anti-conversion law clashes with these?

The anti-conversion law can clash with Article 25 by potentially restricting an individual's freedom to choose and practice their religion, including the choice to convert. It clashes with the Right to Privacy because the state's intervention in an adult's decision to marry and convert infringes upon their personal autonomy and privacy.

Exam Tip

Remember that Article 25 is subject to public order, morality, and health. The key is whether the law's restrictions are 'reasonable' in light of these limitations.

3. What's the difference between the 'UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021' and similar laws in other states?

While the core aim of preventing forced conversions is similar across states, the specific provisions vary. Some laws require prior government approval for conversions, while others place the burden of proof on the convert to prove the conversion was not forced. The stringency and procedural requirements differ.

Exam Tip

For Mains, compare and contrast the provisions of different state laws. Focus on aspects like the requirement for prior approval, definition of 'unlawful conversion,' and penalties.

4. If a Mains question asks me to 'Critically examine the Allahabad HC ruling,' what opposing viewpoints should I include?

You should include the following opposing viewpoints: * Individual Liberty vs. Societal Concerns: Acknowledge the court's emphasis on individual freedom and privacy but also discuss concerns about potential exploitation of vulnerable individuals through forced conversions. * State's Role: The state's argument that it has a duty to prevent unlawful conversions should be presented, even while highlighting the court's rejection of that argument in this specific case. * Potential Misuse of Freedom: Briefly address the concern that the freedom to convert could be misused for ulterior motives, even if the court didn't find evidence of that here.

•Individual Liberty vs. Societal Concerns: Acknowledge the court's emphasis on individual freedom and privacy but also discuss concerns about potential exploitation of vulnerable individuals through forced conversions.
•State's Role: The state's argument that it has a duty to prevent unlawful conversions should be presented, even while highlighting the court's rejection of that argument in this specific case.
•Potential Misuse of Freedom: Briefly address the concern that the freedom to convert could be misused for ulterior motives, even if the court didn't find evidence of that here.

Exam Tip

Always present a balanced view in 'Critically examine' questions. Acknowledge the strengths and weaknesses of both sides of the argument.

5. How does this Allahabad HC ruling fit into the larger trend of judicial intervention in matters of personal liberty and state laws?

This ruling is part of a broader trend where High Courts and the Supreme Court are increasingly scrutinizing state laws that potentially infringe upon fundamental rights. The judiciary is acting as a check on legislative and executive actions, ensuring they align with constitutional principles.

Exam Tip

Track similar cases where courts have intervened to protect personal liberties against potentially overreaching state laws. Note the grounds on which the courts based their decisions.

6. What specific sections of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 were likely debated in this case, and why?

Sections 8 and 9 were likely debated. These sections probably deal with the procedure for conversion and the burden of proof. The state likely argued that the interfaith couples didn't follow the prescribed procedure, while the court emphasized that the law shouldn't unduly restrict individual choice.

Exam Tip

When a law is in the news, always try to find and understand the specific sections that are being challenged or interpreted. This shows deeper understanding.

7. From an interview perspective, how can I present a balanced view on the UP anti-conversion law?

Acknowledge the state's intent to prevent forced conversions and protect vulnerable individuals. However, emphasize the importance of upholding individual liberty and the right to privacy. Highlight the judiciary's role in safeguarding these rights and ensuring that laws are not used to unduly restrict personal freedoms.

Exam Tip

Avoid taking an extreme position. Show that you understand the complexities of the issue and can appreciate different perspectives.

8. How might this Allahabad HC ruling influence similar cases related to interfaith marriages and anti-conversion laws in other states?

This ruling sets a precedent for other High Courts to follow. It reinforces the importance of protecting individual liberties and privacy in matters of marriage and conversion. Other courts may cite this ruling when considering the validity and interpretation of similar laws in their respective states.

Exam Tip

Follow news reports on similar cases in other states. Note whether the courts are citing the Allahabad HC ruling and how they are interpreting it.

9. What is the likely Prelims angle here – what specific fact related to this news would they test?

UPSC might ask a direct question about the Article of the Constitution related to freedom of religion (Article 25) or the Right to Privacy and link it to the Allahabad High Court's ruling on interfaith marriages. A likely distractor would be to confuse Article 25 with another article related to cultural or educational rights.

Exam Tip

Memorize the key articles related to fundamental rights, especially those concerning freedom of religion, expression, and personal liberty. Pay attention to the limitations and exceptions associated with each right.

10. Will this Allahabad HC ruling be more relevant to GS Paper 2 (Polity & Governance) or GS Paper 1 (Social Issues)?

This ruling is MOST relevant to GS Paper 2 (Polity & Governance). While it touches upon social issues, the core of the news is about the interpretation and application of laws, the role of the judiciary, and the protection of fundamental rights – all central to the Polity & Governance syllabus.

Exam Tip

When categorizing news for UPSC, focus on the PRIMARY aspect of the news. Even if it has implications for multiple papers, identify the MOST relevant one.

Practice Questions (MCQs)

1. Consider the following statements regarding the Right to Privacy in India: 1. The Right to Privacy is explicitly mentioned as a Fundamental Right in the Indian Constitution. 2. The Supreme Court recognized the Right to Privacy as a Fundamental Right under Article 21 in the *Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs. Union of India* case. 3. The Right to Privacy is absolute and not subject to any reasonable restrictions. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A.1 and 2 only
B.2 only
C.1 and 3 only
D.1, 2 and 3

Show Answer

Answer: B

Statement 1 is INCORRECT: The Right to Privacy is not explicitly mentioned as a Fundamental Right in the Indian Constitution but is interpreted as part of Article 21. Statement 2 is CORRECT: The Supreme Court recognized the Right to Privacy as a Fundamental Right under Article 21 in the *Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs. Union of India* case (2017). Statement 3 is INCORRECT: The Right to Privacy is not absolute and is subject to reasonable restrictions.

2. Which of the following statements accurately describes the scope of Article 25 of the Indian Constitution? A) It guarantees an absolute right to convert to any religion without any restrictions. B) It guarantees the freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion, subject to public order, morality, and health. C) It allows the state to regulate all religious activities without any limitations. D) It only applies to minority religions and not to the majority religion.

Show Answer

Answer: B

Option B is correct. Article 25 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion, but this right is subject to public order, morality, and health. The other options are incorrect because Article 25 is not an absolute right, it applies to all religions, and the state's power to regulate religious activities is limited.

3. In the context of interfaith marriages and anti-conversion laws, what is the primary concern regarding individual liberty? A) Ensuring that individuals are not coerced or forced into converting to another religion for the sake of marriage. B) Ensuring that religious institutions have the right to approve or disapprove of interfaith marriages. C) Ensuring that the state has the power to regulate all aspects of marriage and religion. D) Ensuring that only individuals from the same religion are allowed to marry.

Show Answer

Answer: A

Option A is correct. The primary concern regarding individual liberty in the context of interfaith marriages and anti-conversion laws is ensuring that individuals are not coerced or forced into converting to another religion for the sake of marriage. This is to protect their freedom of conscience and choice. The other options are incorrect as they either infringe upon individual liberty or grant excessive power to the state or religious institutions.