10 High Court rulings that stood out in 2021 related to the Uniform Civil Code and religious conversion

A wide range of issues were addressed by High Courts across the country in 2021, many of which sparked debate and controversy. Among others, verdicts have been handed down in cases involving the photograph of Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Covid-19 vaccine certificates, dowry cases, women's rights, live-in relationships, and the Uniform Civil Code, among others.

In the final days of 2021, here are ten significant high court rulings and remarks:

1) PM Modi's photograph on vaccine certificate: In a significant judgment amid voices opposing PM Modi's photo on the COVID-19 vaccination certificate, the Kerala High Court on December 13 dismissed a petition with costs, stating that the PM is the leader of the nation, and no one should be ashamed to possess a vaccination certificate with his photo along with the morale-boosting message. Peter Myaliparampil's petition was dismissed by the High Court with a cost of Rs 1 lakh. Additionally, the petition was deemed frivolous and filed with ulterior motives.

In addition, the Kerala High Court noted that the petitioner himself works at an institution named after a former prime minister. According to the petitioner, he is an extension faculty of the Kerala Institute of Local Administration and State Level Master Coach of the Jawaharlal Nehru Leadership Institute. When the counsel for the petitioner was arguing the case, I asked him why his client is working as the State Level Master Coach of the Jawaharlal Nehru Leadership Institute. The institute bears the name of Jawaharlal Nehru. However, the court stated that there is no proper answer to the question.

2) 'Oral sex with a minor is not considered aggravated sexual assault': The Allahabad High Court ruled that 'oral sex' with a minor is not considered aggravated sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO). On November 18, the court made the observation as it reduced the jail term of a man convicted of sexually assaulting a 10-year-old boy. In its ruling, the HC said that the convict's crime falls under the 'penetrative sexual assault' category, which is punishable under Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

A police complaint was filed against him in 2016 alleging that he had 'oral sex' with a 10-year-old boy. Justice Anil Kumar Ojha stated, "From the perusal of the provisions of POCSO Act, it is clear that the offence committed by Appellant does not fall under either Section 5/6 or Section 9(M) of the Act because there is a "penetrative sexual assault." in the present case.

3) Uniform Civil Code: On July 7 this year, the Delhi High Court addressed the contentious issue of the Uniform Civil Code and stressed the urgent need for its enactment and implementation. As he delivered a verdict in a case pertaining to the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 involving the Meena community on July 7, Justice Prathiba M Singh asked the central government to take the necessary steps.

In its decision, the High Court noted that Indian society is becoming increasingly homogeneous and dissolving traditional barriers of religion, community, and caste. According to the court, couples struggling with intercaste marriage often face conflicts arising from personal laws, and the court is often faced with these conflicts. The court noted that a Uniform Civil Code, envisioned in Article 44 of the Constitution of India, would enable uniform laws to be applied in matters of marriage, divorce, and succession, thus reducing conflicts arising from personal law.

4) Caste and Religious Conversion: The Madras High Court ruled that a person's caste does not change if he changes his religion. The case concerned a religious conversion carried out so as to obtain government services. A marriage certificate based on a community certificate cannot also be issued for inter-caste marriages when one of the parties is from a different caste and religion. During a hearing in November, a Dalit who had converted to Christianity sought an inter-caste marriage certificate that would have allowed him to get a priority in government jobs.

The petitioner belongs to the Adi-Dravida community, while the girl belongs to the Hindu Arunthathiyar community. Both communities are Scheduled Castes. According to the petitioner, he was issued a 'Backward Caste' certificate when he converted to Christianity, but his wife was issued a 'Scheduled Caste' certificate, and hence, their marriage was inter-caste.

5) Widow's right to property: The Chhattisgarh High Court ruled on June 28 this year that a widow does not have any right to the property inherited from her previous (dead) husband if she marries again and her current marriage is valid. The HC held that remarriage results in widow losing her right to inherit property from her husband and unless the fact of the remarriage is strictly proved after observing the ceremonies required as per Section 6 of the Hindu Widows Remarriage Act 1856, the fact of remarriage cannot be established by which the right to property is lost for the widow.

6)In another case related to unnatural sex, the Chhattisgarh High Court ruled on August 26 that forced copulation by a husband with his legally wedded wife, against her will, is not rape. LiveLaw reported that the court made the remarks while hearing a case involving marital rape. However, the High Court ordered the man to be charged under Section 377 of the IPC for making unnatural physical relations with his wife. Based on Exception II of Section 375, Justice NK Chandravanshi held that if the wife is not a minor, then sexual intercourse by the husband "would not constitute an offence of rape, even if it is by force".

7) 'Wedding gifts to daughter not dowry': The Kerala High Court ruled that gifts given to a girl by her parents on her wedding, without any such demand coming from the groom's side, cannot be labeled as dowry and are not punishable under the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Divorce proceedings had been filed by a couple. The husband had appealed the order of the District Dowry Prohibition Officer convicting him in the case to the HC. A man testified before the court that the jewellery given by his wife's family was kept by them in a bank locker, and the key to the locker was with her. Moreover, the court noted that the husband has agreed to give the gold ornaments to his wife, who has also expressed a willingness to accept them.

8) 'Sex on the promise of marriage is not cheating': The Bombay High Court ruled on December 9 that a man's refusal to marry his girlfriend when they have been in a physical relationship with mutual consent for a long time is not cheating. In the case filed by the woman, the high court overturned a lower court's conviction of the man. Despite lack of evidence to show that the man intended to marry the woman from the beginning, the High Court acquitted the accused man.

The court noted that the man and woman were known to each other and had a relationship. This statement reads, "There is no evidence on record to suggest that the accused did not intend to marry her since the inception.". The mere refusal to marry would not constitute an offence under Section 417 of the IPC in the absence of proof that the prosecutrix consented to physical relationship on a misconception of facts, as stipulated under Section 90 of IPC.".

9) 'Sex life of victim cannot be used to absolve an accused of rape': The Kerala High Court ruled on October 11 that women or girls who are of easy virtue or who have a habit of participating in sexual affairs cannot be used to absolve anyone of rape. In this case, the HC heard allegations that a father raped his daughter and made her pregnant. Furthermore, the court noted that the father is expected to be a 'fortress of refuge' for his daughter and that when a father rapes his daughter, it is worse than a gatekeeper becoming a poacher or a treasury guard becoming a robber.

The victim's father claims that he is being falsely implicated in the case as his daughter has admitted that she had sexual relations with another person. While dismissing the claims, the high court said that the father was obligated to provide the victim girl with protection and support. According to the high court, no crime can be more grave and heinous than a father raping his daughter. A father then becomes a predator.

10) The Constitution cannot be overridden by public morality: The Rajasthan High Court, in dealing with a case related to live-in relationships this year, ruled on September 15 that public morality cannot come in the way of protecting such couples even if one partner is married to another. In support of the right to life and citing the case of terrorist Ajmal Kasab, the Rajasthan HC noted that when a convicted criminal is granted this right under Article 21 of the Constitution, it cannot be denied to anyone in a legal or illegal relationship. Likewise, the court noted that the public cannot impose moral policing on the state. As it stated, constitutional morality cannot be overshadowed by public morality.