32nd ALL-INDIA INTER UNIVERSITY MOOT COURT COMPETITION - 2016
BEFORE THE HONORABLE FAMILY COURT OF GUNTUR , ANDHRA PRADESH
(Section 9, 15, 20 of Code of Civil Procedure)
IN THE MATTERS OF MR . MOHANPLAINTIFF
V.
MS. FATIMA...DEFENDANT
ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF COTETS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!i "#E$ OF A%T&O'"T"ES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ii S%A' OF FACTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!iv STATEET OF *%'"S#"CT"O!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!vi "SS%ES FO' COS"#E'AT"O!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!vii "!
+ete +eterr -.rri./ -.rri./ee eteen eteen o.n o.n .nd F.ti-. F.ti-. in &indu &indu forfor- v.lid!! v.lid!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!vii !vii
""!
+eter +eter -.rri./e -.rri./e eteen eteen o.n .nd F.ti-. F.ti-. in in u3liu3li- forfor- v.lid!!!! v.lid!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!vii !!!!vii
"""! +eter +eter re3tituti re3titution on of con4u/.l con4u/.l ri/t3 ri/t3 c.n e /r.nted /r.nted to o.n!! o.n!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!vii !!!!!!vii S%A' OF A'%ETS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!vii "!
+ete +eterr te te -.rri. -.rri./e /e etee eteen n o.n o.n .nd .nd F.ti-. F.ti-. in in &indu &indu forfor- v.li v.lid!! d!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!vi !!!!viii ii
"!
+ete +eterr te te -.rri. -.rri./e /e et eteen een o. o.n n .nd F.ti-. F.ti-. in u3l u3lii- forfor- v.lid!!!!!! v.lid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!v !!!!!!!!!!viii iii
""!
+eter +eter re3tit re3titution ution of con4u/.l con4u/.l ri/t3 ri/t3 e /r.nted /r.nted to o.n!!!!!!! o.n!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!viii !!!!!!!!!!viii
A'%ETS A#6ACE#!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 "!
Te -.rri -.rri./e ./e ete eteen en te Pl.in Pl.intif tifff .nd #efend. #efend.nt nt in &indu &indu forfor- i3 not not v.lid!!! v.lid!!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!1 !!!1 A!
#efend.nt #efend.nt i3 . u3liu3li- 7 reli/ reli/ion ion .nd .nd er er conver3 conver3ion ion i3 i3 not not v.lid!!! v.lid!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 !!!!!!!1
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
2
B!
Te &indu .rri./e Act i3 not .88lic.le to te defend.nt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!2
C!
#efend.nt i3 inco-8etent to -.rr7!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
#!
#efend.nt:3 con3ent .3 ot.ined on fr.udulent /round3!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!;
""!
Te -.rri./e eteen te Pl.intiff .nd #efend.nt in u3li- for- i3 not v.lid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!;
A!
Te 8l.intiff i3 . &indu!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!5
B!
Tere .3 een conver3ion to te ori/in.l reli/ion to ic e.rlier /ener.tion3 .d
elon/ed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!5 C!
Tere .3 to e evidence re/.rdin/ .cce8t.nce 7 te co--unit7!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!5
#!
o.--ed.n L. i3 not .88lic.le to te 8l.intiff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<
E!
A3ence of free con3ent on te 8.rt of defend.nt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!=
"""! 'e3titution of Con4u/.l 'i/t3 c.nnot e /r.nted to Pl.intiff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!= A!
Pl.intiff c.nnot cl.i- re3titution of con4u/.l ri/t3 under o.--ed.n l.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!=
B!
Pl.intiff c.nnot cl.i- re3titution of con4u/.l ri/t3 under &indu l.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>
P'AE' FO' 'EL"EF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!9
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
3
INDE! OF AUTHORITIES
CASES Abdul Kadir v. Salima, "!L!'! > All! >90???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????> Annjana Devi vs. Prahlad , (19=1) = Ben/ L' 2;???????????????????????????????????????????????????????; Arun Ghosh vs State of West Bengal , A"' 19>9 SC >>0?????????????????????????????????????????????????2 Atkia Begum v. Mohd. Ibrahim, A"' 1929 All! 1>????????????????????????????????????????????????????????= Atkia Begum v. Mohd.Abraham, A"'19=> All! >9????????????????????????????????????????????????????????= asanKutti v. !ainabha, A"' 192> .d! 12>=????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????= K.P. Manu v. "hairman S#rutin$ "ommunit$ for verifi#ation of #ertifi#ate, A"' 2015 SC 1;02? ?5 Kulsumbi v. Abdul Kadir , A"' 1921 Bo-! 20=???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????= Pun$abi v. Sugrabi, A"' 200> !P!L!*! 112???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????< %ev. Staininslausvs State of Madh$a Pradesh, A"' 19== SC 90>??????????????????????????????????????2 Section 2 (1) (.), &indu .rri./e Act, 1955?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????2 Subir Kumar Kundu vs. State of West Bengal , (1992), CriL* 1502????????????????????????????????????? Sukram v. MsihriBai, A"' 19=9 P 1==???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????>
STAT%TES Article 25 (1), Con3titution of "ndi., 1950?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????2 Section 12 (c) &indu .rri./e Act, 1955??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????; Section 2 (1) (.)
[email protected] (c), &indu .rri./e Act, 1955???????????????????????????????????????????2 Section 2 (1) (c), &indu .rri./e Act????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Section 251 of te Princi8le3 of o.--ed.n L. 7 ull., 1=t Edition, 2010!?????????????????< Section 5, (iii), &indu .rri./e Act, 1955????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
4
Section 5, Te S8eci.l .rri./e Act,195;????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Section < (1) (i) &indu .rri./e Act, 1955??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Section 9, Te &indu .rri./e Act, 1955?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????>
OT&E' A%T&O'"T"ES tt8/untur-edic.lcolle/e!edu!in8./eidD1 (.cce33ed Feru.r7 21, 201<)?????????????????????< ull., &indu L., S.t7.4eet #e3.i Ed!, 213t ed! 2010 Le@i3??????????????????????????????????????????? Secton 1; of te Princi8le3 of o.--ed.n L. 7 ull., 1=t Edition, 2010?????????????????????< Sri ! ! '.o, Freedo- of 'eli/ion .nd 'i/t to Conver3ion, (200) PL +e*our 19???????????1
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
5
SUMMARY OF FACTS I
o.n:3 8.rent3 converted teir reli/ion fro- &indui3- to "3l.- .3 te7 ere di3cri-in.ted 7 oter co--unit7 -e-er3 on te .3i3 of c.3te! o.n u3ed to live it er -.tern.l /r.nd8.rent3 o ere &indu 7 reli/ion! &e fro- i3 cildood en4o7ed /oin/ to o3ue .3 ell .3 te-8le! II
o.n .nted to eco-e . #octor .nd e .88lied in untur edic.l Colle/e for te 3.-e! &e /ot i-3elf converted to &indui3- for te 3.e of te re3erv.tion .nd /ot .d-i33ion on . 3e.t re3erved for Sceduled C.3te! III
"n i3 fift 7e.r e -et . /irl n.-ed F.ti-. o .3 i3 nei/or durin/ i3 cildood! o.n loved F.ti-. ut tried to ee8 i-3elf ..7 .3 e ne .out er f.ter:3 8o3ition .nd teir 3t.tu3 in 3ociet7! &oever, e .3 not .le to ee8 i-3elf ..7 for lon/! IV
F.ti-. told o.n t.t 3e c.n convince er F.ter for -.rri./e .3 ot ere u3li-3! o.n di3clo3ed to er .out i3 conver3ion .nd te re.3on for 3uc conver3ion! F.ti-. fe.red t.t er f.ter ould di3connect rel.tion3i8 fro- er .3 e i3 . 3tron/ folloer of "3l.-!
V
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
6
#urin/ inter F.ti-. ent o-e to er 8.rent3, ere 3e re.liGed t.t er f.ter i3 8l.nnin/ for er -.rri./e! Se told ti3 to o.n! o.n convinced er to -.rr7 i- .nd te7 ot /ot -.rried in &indu for-! For ti3 F.ti-. converted e r reli/ion to &indui3VI
Bot of te- ./.in /ot -.rried, ut ti3 ti-e in u3li- for- to -.e er f.ter .cce8t ti3 -.rri./e! F.ti-. felt /uilt7 .out er 3ecret -.rri./e .nd confe33ed ever7tin/ in front of er f.ter! VII
&er f.ter .dvi3ed er t.t o.n i3 not . tru3tort7 8er3on .3 i3 .88ro.c i3 not /enuine! &e .3 c.n/ed i3 reli/ion 4u3t to /et .d-i33ion in colle/e! &e -.de er to c.n/e er reli/ion for te 3.e of -.rri./e! Terefore 3e 3to88ed .ll er cont.ct3 it o.n! VIII
o.n .88lied for re3titution of Con4u/.l ri/t3 under &indu .rri./e Act, F.ti-. o88o3ed 7 3.7in/ t.t er -.rri./e it o.n in &indu for- i3 not v.lid .3 3e i3 . u3li-! Ten o.n cl.i-ed t.t even if teir -.rri./e under &indu for- i3 not v.lid con4u/.l ri/t3 c.n e cl.i-ed on te .3i3 of teir u3li- -.rri./e! &ence, te -. tter re.ced to te F.-il7 Court of untur!
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
7
STATEMENT OF "URISDICTION
Te Pl.intiff -o3t u-l7 .nd re38ectfull7, 3u-it3 t.t ti3 &on:le Court .3 te reui3ite 4uri3diction to entert.in .nd .d4udic.te ti3 -.tter under Section 9, 15, 20 of Code of Civil Procedure, 190>! "t i3 furter 3u-itted t.t .ll 8rocedur.l reuire-ent3 .ve een .dered to in te 8re3cried -.nner! Te 8re3ent -e-or.ndu- 3et3 fort te f.ct3, contention3 .nd .r/u-ent3!
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
8
ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
&he follo'ing (uestions are )resented for adjudi#ation in the )resent matter. I.
#HETHER MARRIAGE BET#EEN MOHAN AND FATIMA IN HINDU FORM VALID$
II.
#HETHER MARRIAGE BET#EEN MOHAN AND FATIMA IN MUSLIM FORM VALID$
III.
#HETHER RESTITUTION OF CON"UGAL RIGHTS CAN BE GRANTED TO MOHAN$
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
9
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
I.
Whether the marriage between Mohan and Fatima in Hindu form valid?
F.ti-. .3 orn in . u3li- f.-il7 .nd er f.ter .3 . 3tron/ folloer of "3l.-! %nder e-otion.l tre.t .nd 8re33ure F.ti-. .cce8ted to convert er reli/ion, in order to -.rr7 o.n under &indu L.! &ence F.ti-.:3 conver3ion to &indui3- i3 not v.lid! .rri./e eteen o.n .nd F.ti-. too 8l.ce in . te-8le 3itu.ted .t untur under &indu cu3to-3! "t c.nnot e eld .3 . v.lid -.rri./e .nd -u3t e eld void .3 F.ti-. .3 . u3li- 7 reli/ion .nd under &indu l. -.rri./e eteen &indu .nd u3li- i3 null .nd void!
I.
Whether the marriage between Mohan and Fatima in Muslim form valid?
o.n .3 converted to i3 ori/in.l reli/ion to ic i3 f.-il7 elon/ed! oreover e .3 een .cce8ted 7 te co--unit7 .3 i3 re3erv.tion certific.te .3 .cce8ted 7 te colle/e! &ence, e /ot converted into &indui3- 7 t.in/ 8.rt in Sudi cere-on7! o.n fir3t -.de F.ti-. to convert er reli/ion on te .3i3 of e-otion.l 8re33ure .nd ten te7 ot /ot -.rried under &indu for- in . te-8le! L.ter te7 .l3o -.rried under u3li- for- .nd . H.Gi in untur 8erfor-ed teir -.rri./e! &oever teir -.rri./e c.nnot e ter-ed .3 v.lid ec.u3e o.n i3 . &indu .nd -.rri./e eteen . &indu .nd u3li- i3 null .nd void!
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
10
II.
Whether restitution of conjugal rights be granted to Mohan?
o.n c.nnot cl.i- re3titution of con4u/.l ri/t3 .3 ot te -.rri./e under &indu .3 ell .3 u3li- L. i3 void .nd ence F.ti-. .3 re.3on.le e@cu3e to den7 re3titution of con4u/.l ri/t3!
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
1
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED I.
THE MARRIAGE BET#EEN THE PLAINTIFF AND DEFENDANT IN HINDU FORM IS NOT VALID.
Te -.rri./e eteen te Pl.intiff .nd #efend.nt too 8l.ce in . te-8le 3itu.ted .t untur under &indu cu3to-3! "t c.nnot e eld .3 . v.lid -.rri./e .nd -u3t e eld void on folloin/ /round3!
A. Defendant is a Muslim by religion and her conversion is not valid.
Te defend.nt .3 orn in . u3li- f.-il7 .nd er f.ter .3 . 3tron/ folloer of "3l.-! %nder e-otion.l tre.t .nd 8re33ure fro- te .88ell.nt, te defend.nt .cce8ted to convert er reli/ion, in order to -.rr7 te 8l.intiff under &indu L.! &oever, te ri/t to conver3ion connote3 te individu.l ri/t of . 8er3on to uit one reli/ion .nd e-r.ce .noter volunt.ril7! Ti3 ind of c.n/e fro- one reli/ion to .noter reli/ion -u3t nece33.ril7 e in con3euence of one:3 conviction t.t te reli/ion in ic e .3 orn into .3 not -e.3ured u8 to i3
[email protected], 38iritu.l or n.tion.l!1 "n ti3 8.rticul.r c.3e, .3 3oon .3 8l.intiff told te defend.nt .out i3 conver3ion, 3e fe.red t.t er f.ter ould not .cce8t te-! Fro- te f.ct3, it c.n e con3trued t.t defend.nt never .nted to /o ./.in3t er f.ter:3 i3e3 .nd it .3 onl7 under e-otion.l tre.t .nd 8re33ure t.t 3e ./reed to -.rr7 8l.intiff for ic te 8l.intiff -.de er under/o . Sudi Cere-on7 for er reli/iou3 conver3ion to &indui3-!
1Sri
! ! '.o, Freedo- of 'eli/ion .nd 'i/t to Conver3ion, (200) PL +e*our 19
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
2
Terefore, te defend.nt:3 conver3ion i3 not volunt.r7 .nd i3 .3ed on force .nd
[email protected] 8re33ure! oreover, te conver3ion i3 not .3ed on te defend.nt:3 reli/iou3 conviction3! o3t i-8ort.ntl7, ever7 8er3on .3 . ri/t to 8rofe33 i3 on reli/ion .nd to .ct .ccordin/ to it! 2 o one c.n interfere it te ri/t of oter 8eo8le 7 re3ortin/ to conver3ion 7 force, fr.ud or .llure-ent! "f . 8er3on intervene3 in 3uc . -.nner, it i3 . viol.tion of Article 25 (1) of te Con3titution of "ndi., ic /u.r.ntee3 reli/iou3 freedo- 3u4ect to 8ulic orde r !; Terefore, oldin/ te defend.nt:3 conver3ion to &indui3- v.lid i3 . viol.tion of er fund.-ent.l ri/t3!
. !he Hindu Marriage Act is not a""licable to the defendant.
Te defend.nt:3 conver3ion to &indui3- i3 null .nd void .3 it i3 . forced .nd fr.udulent conver3ion!5 Terefore, 3ince te defend.nt never /ot converted, ence er -.rri./e in &indu for- i3 not le/.ll7 v.lid! "t .3 een cle.rl7 38ecified t.t &indu .rri./e Act .88lie3 onl7 to to3e o .re eiter &indu 7 irt < or .ve converted to &indui3-!= "n te 8re3ent c.3e, te defend.nt .3 orn . u3li2 Article
3 %ev.
25 (1), Con3titution of "ndi., 1950
Staininslaus vs State of Madh$a Pradesh, A"' 19== SC 90>
4 Arun
Ghosh vs State of West Bengal , A"' 19>9 SC >>0
5 "33ue1!1
6 Section
2 (1) (.), &indu .rri./e Act, 1955
7 Section
2 (1) (.)
[email protected] (c), &indu .rri./e Act, 1955
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
3
.nd .3 -.de to under/o . Sudi Cere-on7 7 u3e of e-otion.l 8re33ure .nd .llure-ent of -.rri./e ic doe3 not con3titute . v.lid conver3ion! "t .3 een cle.rl7 38ecified t.t te &indu .rri./e Act doe3 not .88l7 to u3li-3! > Terefore, . -.rri./e eteen . &indu .nd u3li-, c.rried out in . te-8le under &indu ritu.l3 3.ll e ter-ed .3 null .nd void .3 one of te .fore3.id 8.rtie3 (F.ti-.) i3 not under .n7 oli/.tion to follo te &indu .rri./e Act!9 To en3ure te v.lidit7 of . -.rri./e eteen . &indu .nd u3li-, te -.rri./e -u3t e re/i3tered, for ic . 8ro8er notice of intended -.rri./e .3 to e 8rovided!10 &oever, ti3 .3 not done in te 8re3ent c.3e! Terefore, te -.rri./e i3 neiter covered under te &indu .rri./e Act nor te S8eci.l .rri./e Act! &ence, teir -.rri./e .3 8er &indu tr.dition3 i3 not . le/.ll7 reco/niGed on e!
#. Defendant is incom"etent to marry.
#efend.nt i3 elo te 8re3cried ./e of -.rri./e under te &indu .rri./e Act! Accordin/ to te &indu .rri./e Act, te ride:3 ./e ein/ .t le.3t 1> i3 . nece33.r7 condition to co--ence -.rri./e under &indu L.!11
8 Section
9Subir
2 (1) (c), &indu .rri./e Act
Kumar Kundu vs. State of West Bengal , (1992), CriL* 1502
10Section
5, Te S8eci.l .rri./e Act,195;
11Section
5, (iii), &indu .rri./e Act, 1955
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
4
"n c.3e3 ere te ride i3 under 1>, te con3ent of te /u.rdi.n of te ride i3 reuired!12 "n te 8re3ent c.3e, te defend.nt:3 f.ter c.n e ter-ed .3 te /u.rdi.n!1 &oever, e never con3ented for -.rri./e! oreover e .3 ./.in3t te ide. of defend.nt /ettin/ -.rried to 8l.intiff! Since, in te 8re3nt c.3e, te ./e of te defend.nt i3 4u3t 1= 7e.r3 .nd er f.ter .3 not /iven i3 con3ent for er -.rri./e, terefore te -.rri./e c.n e ter-ed .3 void under &indu L.!
D. Defendant$s consent was obtained on fraudulent grounds.
"f te con3ent for -.rri./e .3 een ot.ined 7 force or fr.ud, te -.rri./e c.n e .nnulled .nd decl.red null .nd void!
1;
"n te 8re3ent c.3e 8l.intiff 8ut defend.nt under 3uc e-otion.l
8re33ure t.t 3e .d no o8tion ut to /ive con3ent for te -.rri./e! "n c.3e3 ere te -.rri./e i3 not . volunt.r7 .ct of te ife ten te -.rri./e i3 li.le to e .nnulled! 15 #efend.nt:3 con3ent .3 not volunt.ril7 .3 3e .3 e-otion.ll7 8re33uriGed 7 8l.intiff into -.rr7in/ i- even en 3e did not .nt to /o ./.in3t te ill of er f.ter! oreover, te defend.nt onl7 e@8re33ed .n initi.l de3ire to -.rr7 8l.intiff ec.u3e 3e .3n:t ..re of te f.ct t.t 8l.intiff .3 under/one reli/iou3 conver3ion! A3 3oon .3 3e c.-e to no .out te re.lit7 3e dro88ed te ide. of -.rri./e! &ence, te initi.l .88rov.l .3 .l3o .3ed on te fr.udulent .ct3 of te 8l.intiff .nd i3 ence, void! 12ull.,
&indu L., S.t7.4eet #e3.i Ed!, 213t ed! 2010 Le@i3
13Section
< (1) (i) &indu .rri./e Act, 1955
14Section
12 (c) &indu .rri./e Act, 1955
15 Annjana
Devi vs. Prahlad , (19=1) = Ben/ L' 2;
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
5
&ence te -.rri./e eteen 8l.intiff .nd defend.nt under &indu for- 3.ll e ter-ed .3 null .nd void!
II.
THE MARRIAGE BET#EEN THE PLAINTIFF AND DEFENDANT IN MUSLIM FORM IS NOT VALID.
Te 8l.intiff .nd te defend.nt .l3o -.rried under u3li- for- .nd . H.Gi in untur 8erfor-ed teir -.rri./e! &oever teir -.rri./e c.nnot e ter-ed .3 v.lid on folloin/ /round3?
A. !he "laintiff is a Hindu.
"n te 8re3ent c.3e, te 8l.intiff underent . Sudi Cere-on7 .nd converted to &indui3-, . reli/ion to ic i3 8.rent3 ori/in.ll7 elon/ed, efore teir conver3ion! Te ue3tion of te v.lidit7 of . conver3ion to &indui3- i3 of con3ider.le i-8ort.nce .nd con3euence, ere te court .3 to deter-ine eter . 8er3on c.n e re/.rded .3 . -e-er of te &indu reli/ion!1< To tin/3 need to e e3t.li3ed en . 8er3on cl.i-3 to .ve converted .c to i3 ori/in.l reli/ion?1=
16ull.,
&indu L., S.t7.4eet #e3.i Ed!, 213t ed! 2010 Le@i3 8!9> I 6.r/e3e eor/e, C.3tei3 te con3t.nt, #ece-er 21, 201;, Te &indu, .v.il.le .t tt8!teindu!co-3und.7? .ncorconver3ion?confu3ion?c.3te?i3?tecon3t.nt.rticle<=11;;2!ece (.cce33ed Feru.r7 2;, 201<)
17 K.P. Manu
v. "hairman S#rutin$ "ommunit$ for verifi#ation of #ertifi#ate, A"' 2015 SC 1;02
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
6
. !here has been conversion to the original religion to which earlier generations had belonged.
Te 8l.intiff 38ent -o3t of i3 cildood it i3 -.tern.l /r.nd8.rent3 o ere &indu 7 reli/ion! oreover, i3 8.rent3 ere .l3o &indu 7 irt ut l.ter converted to "3l.- .3 te7 ere ein/ di3cri-in.ted ./.in3t on te .3i3 of teir c.3te! &ence, 8l.intiff converted to . reli/ion to ic i3 e.rlier /ener.tion3 elon/ed!
#. !here has to be evidence regarding acce"tance by the community.
Te 8l.intiff, .fter reconvertin/ to &indui3-, .88lied for .d-i33ion to te untur edic.l Colle/e! &e .3 .cce8ted .3 -e-er elon/in/ to te re3erved c.te/or7 of Sceduled C.3te! Furter, if .n or/.niG.tion reco/niGed 7 te 3t.te .3 /r.nted . certific.te in c.te/oric.l ter-3 in f.vour of te 8l.intiff, ten it c.n e con3trued t.t co--unit7 .3 .cce8ted te 8l.intiff .nd no furter enuirie3 .re reuired!1> Te 8l.intiff .3 .cce8ted .3 . -e-er of Sceduled C.3te 7 te untur edic.l Colle/e ic i3 .n in3titution reco/niGed 7 te 3t.te!19 Terefore, te 8l.intiff c.n e 3.id to .ve /otten te nece33.r7 .cce8t.nce fro- te co--unit7! &ence, te 8l.intiff:3 conver3ion to &indui3- i3 . v.lid one!
18 "id
19tt8/untur-edic.lcolle/e!edu!in8./eidD1
(.cce33ed Feru.r7 21, 201<)
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
7
D. Mohammedan %aw is not a""licable to the "laintiff.
For . -.rri./e to e 3ole-niGed under o.--ed.n L., e.c 8.rt7 to te -.rri./e 3ould e . o.--ed.n!20 A -.rri./e under o.--ed.n L. i3 8roiited en one 8.rt7 elon/3 to 3o-e oter reli/ion, e38eci.ll7 te co--unit7 of fire or3i88er3 (&indu3)!21 o3t i-8ort.ntl7, it .3 een e@8re33l7 8rovided t.t . o.--ed.n o-.n c.nnot -.rr7 .n7 -.n o i3 not o.--ed.n .nd 3uc . -.rri./e ould e ter-ed unl.ful under o.--ed.n L.! 22 Since, in te 8re3ent c.3e 8l.intiff underent . reli/iou3 conver3ion into &indui3- .nd never /ot reconvertedI terefore, i3 -.rri./e to te defend.nt i3 not v.lid under o.--ed.n l.!
&. Absence of free consent on the "art of defendant.
A o-.n eco-e3 co-8etent to enter into -.rri./e .3 3oon .3 3e .tt.in3 8uert7! .rri./e c.n e ter-ed v.lid onl7 if ot 8.rtie3 enter into it volunt.ril7!2 Free Con3ent of te 8.rtie3 i3
20Section
251 of te Princi8le3 of o.--ed.n L. 7 ull., 1=t Edition, 2010!
21 Pun$abi
22Secton
23 Atkia
v. Sugrabi, A"' 200> !P!L!*! 112
1; of te Princi8le3 of o.--ed.n L. 7 ull., 1=t Edition, 2010!
Begum v. Mohd.Abraham, A"'19=> All! >9
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
8
.3olutel7 nece33.r7!2; A -.rri./e itout te con3ent of te 8.rtie3 i3 not v.lid!25 Furter, con3ent ot.ined 7 fr.ud ill inv.lid.te te -.rri./e!2< "n te 8re3ent c.3e, te 8l.intiff e-otion.ll7 8re33uriGed te defend.nt into -.rr7in/ i-! For ti3, e fir3t forced te defend.nt to under/o reli/iou3 conver3ion into &indui3- .nd ten for .33ur.nce, e -.de te defend.nt -.rr7 i- under u3li- L. .3 ell! F.ti-. c.nnot e eld to .ve /iven free con3ent .3 3e .3 forced to t.e 8.rt in te -.rri./e under e-otion.l 8re33ure! oreover, it i3 cle.r fro- er 3u3euent conduct t.t 3e never .nted to -.rr7 te 8l.intiff ./.in3t te ill of er f.ter! &ence, te -.rri./e eteen 8l.intiff .nd defend.nt in u3li- for- i3 not v.lid!
III.
OF CON"UGAL R IGHTS CANNOT BE GRANTED TO PLAINTIFF . RESTITUTION
Pl.intiff c.nnot cl.i- re3titution of con4u/.l ri/t3 .3 ot te -.rri./e3 .re void .nd te defend.nt .3 re.3on.le 4u3tific.tion of den7in/ te re3titution of con4u/.l ri/t3!
A. 'laintiff cannot claim restitution of conjugal rights under Mohammedan law.
A u3.nd -.7 3ue i3 ife for re3titution of con4u/.l ri/t3 if 3e ce.3e3 to co.it it iitout .n7 l.ful c.u3e! A -.rri./e under o.--ed.n L. i3 e33enti.ll7 . civil contr.ct! A
24 asanKutti
25 Atkia
v. !ainabha, A"' 192> .d! 12>=
Begum v. Mohd. Ibrahim, A"' 1929 All! 1>
26 Kulsumbi
v. Abdul Kadir , A"' 1921 Bo-! 20=
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
9
3uit for re3titution of con4u/.l ri/t3 i3 of . civil n.ture itin -e.nin/ of Section 9 of Code of Civil Procedure!2= Te deci3ion in . 3uit for re3titution of con4u/.l ri/t3 doe3 not entirel7 de8end u8on te ri/t3 of te u3.nd! Te Court -u3t .l3o con3ider eter it ould -.e it ineuit.le for it to co-8el te ife to live it er u3.nd! "n te 8re3ent c.3e, te 8l.intiff .3 no ri/t to cl.i- con4u/.l ri/t3 .3 te -.rri./e it3elf i3 inv.lid under o.--ed.n l.! oreover, te defend.nt .3 te ri/t to re-.in ..7 froo.n .3 e induced er to -.rr7 i- under e-otion.l 8re33ure! Terefore, te re3titution of con4u/.l ri/t3 in te 8re3ent -.tter i3 ineuit.le .nd unf.ir to te defend.nt! &ence, te 8l.intiff c.nnot cl.i- te re3titution of con4u/.l ri/t3!
. 'laintiff cannot claim restitution of conjugal rights under Hindu law.
"f eiter u3.nd or ife itout .n7 re.3on.le e@cu3e itdr.3 i-3elfer3elf fro- te 3ociet7 of te oter, te .//rieved 8.rt7 -.7 .88l7 for te re3titution of te con4u/.l ri/t3!2> &oever, te -.rri./e eteen o.n .nd F.ti-. under &indu cu3to-3 i3 not v.lid! One of te le/.l /round3 for refu3in/ to /r.nt relief i3 t.t -.rri./e of te 8.rtie3 .3 in viol.tion of te Cild .rri./e 'e3tr.int Act, 1929!29 "n ti3 8.rticul.r c.3e F.ti-. .3 4u3t 1= 7e.r3 old ile te le/.l ./e for -.rri./e i3 1> 7e.r3! &ence, 8l.intiff c.nnot cl.i- re3titution of con4u/.l ri/t3 under &indu L.! 27 Abdul
Kadir v. Salima, "!L!'! > All! >90
28 Section
9, Te &indu .rri./e Act, 1955
29Sukram v. MsihriBai,
A"' 19=9 P 1==
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
10
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
11
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
+erefore, in te li/t3 of te f.ct3 3t.ted, i33ue3 r.i3ed, .r/u-ent3 .dv.nced .nd .utoritie3 cited, it i3 -o3t u-l7 .nd re38ectfull7 8r.7ed efore ti3 &on:le Court t.t it -.7 e 8le.3ed to J A! To di3-i33 te 8l.int B! To decl.re te -.rri./e .3 null .nd void!
P.33 .n7 oter order or /r.nt .n7 oter relief in te end3 of 4u3tice
All of 'hi#h is most humbl$ and res)e#tfull$ submitted
#.te .rc =t, 201<
Coun3el for #efend.nt Pl.ce untur, Andr. Pr.de3
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT