New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India has granted bail to a man who was arrested under the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018, following his marriage to a woman of a different faith.
Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma delivered the judgment, allowing the criminal appeal and setting aside the High Court’s order that had rejected the bail application.
The court addressed the case involving a criminal appeal challenging the February 28, 2025 judgment of the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital in BA1 No. 2576 of 2024. The appellant had been booked under FIR No. 609 of 2024, dated December 12, 2024, lodged with Police Station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, for offences punishable under Sections 3/5 of the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018, and under Sections 318(4) and 319 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Addressing the circumstances of the case, the court noted:
“A frivolous complaint has been lodged against the appellant herein only because he is married to a lady who is following a different faith. The marriage between the parties was an arranged marriage. The facts were known to both sides. The families voluntarily decided to arrange the marriage of the appellant with the lady.”
The court observed the social pressures that led to the legal proceedings, stating:
“However, soon after the marriage, certain persons and certain organisations seemed to have objected to the marriage. This resulted in FIR No. 609 dated 12.12.2024 being lodged against the appellant herein.”
Emphasizing the fundamental right of the couple to live together, the Supreme Court declared:
“The respondent – State cannot have any objection to the appellant and his wife residing together, inasmuch as they have been married as per the wishes of their respective parents and families.”
In a crucial observation protecting the rights of the married couple, the court further stated:
“We also make it clear that the pendency of the criminal proceeding against the appellant herein would not come in the way of the appellant and his wife residing together of their own volition.”
The court directed immediate relief, ordering:
“The appellant shall be produced before the concerned Trial Court as early as possible, and the Trial Court shall release him on bail, subject to such conditions as it may deem appropriate to impose to ensure his presence in the proceedings arising out of FIR No. 609 of 2024.”
The appellant’s senior counsel argued that the complaint was frivolous and that the appellant had been in jail for nearly six months despite the marriage being arranged with the full knowledge and consent of both families.
The court imposed standard conditions for bail compliance, directing that the appellant shall extend complete cooperation in the ensuing trial and shall not misuse his liberty, with any infraction potentially leading to cancellation of bail.
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Senior Advocate, along with Ms. Manjula Gupta (AOR), Mr. Sudhir Kumar Santoshi, and Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar, Advocates, appeared for the petitioner. Mr. Siddharth Sangal (AOR), Ms. Richa Mishra, and Ms. Mushkan Mangla, Advocates, represented the State of Uttarakhand.
Case Title: Aman Siddiqui alias Aman Chaudhary alias Raja vs. State of Uttarakhand
