No authority can stop inter-caste or inter-sect marriage: HC expresses ‘shock’ over narrow outlook in 21st century
Shri Dasuklang Kharjana Vs State of Meghalaya and Ors
Meghalaya HC, Shillong Bench
WP(C) No. 438 of 2018
About/from the judgment:
Inter-caste or Intersect Marriage| Marriage is in no way connected to the service of a person!
“I am really shock that at this 21st century also we are going through such narrow outlook.”
Justice Sudip Ranjan Sen of Meghalaya High Court, in a recent judgment, expressed his ‘anguish and displeasure’ over the removal of a teacher from a school for marrying a woman who belonged to another caste.
“At the outset, I expressed my anguish and displeasure over the whole matter. No authority can stop inter-caste marriage or intersect marriage. It is purely a decision between the private party i.e. bride and bridegroom to choose their life and their marriage is in no way connected with their service,” the judge remarked while allowing the plea by Dasuklang Kharjana.
Dasuklang Kharjana had approached the high court alleging that he has been forced to resign from the post of Assistant Teacher only on the purported ground that he married a woman belonging to a different denomination i.e., Roman Catholic Church.
The court quoted the apex court judgment in Arumugam Servai v. State of Tamil Nadu, in which it was observed that inter-caste marriages are in fact in the national interest as they will result in destroying the caste system.
“I am really shock that at this 21st century also we are going through such narrow outlook,” the judge said while directing the school management to reinstate the teacher immediately. They were also told to pay him Rs 50, 000 as compensation.
Last week, a judgment by Justice Sen had created a huge controversy. While considering a petition relating to the refusal of Domicile Certificate to an Army recruit, Justice SR Sen had observed that, based on religion, India should have been declared a Hindu country. He had also said that anybody opposing the Indian laws and Constitution cannot be considered as a citizen of this country.
These remarks had evoked a strong reaction from political parties and leaders across the country. The Communist Party of India (Marxist) had said it would consult other parties in Parliament to consider moving an impeachment motion for his removal.
A few days later, he issued a clarification and said that his judgment was misinterpreted. He had said: “I do not belong to any political party nor have I got any dream to get any political berth after my retirement and neither is my judgment politically motivated or influenced by any party. Whatever is the truth, history and real ground reality, on that basis I have written my judgment to save the citizens of India irrespective of caste, creed, religion or language and people should understand the history of India and live in peace and harmony. I also mention that I am not a religious fanatic rather I respect all the religions because to me God is one.”
Read the Judgment
Knowledge and content of about almost all their respective descriptions are borrowed from law-related blogs and websites, we, therefore, wish to give proper credit to all the respective law-related blogs and websites like LiveLaw, Bar and Bench, LatestLaws, PathLegal, FirstLaw, Lawctopus, IndianKanoon, Manupatra, LegallyIndia etc.. Many of the judgments are also taken from them websites of Hon'ble Supreme Court and other respective Hon'ble High Courts!