The Supreme Court of India has granted bail to Aman Siddiqui, who was arrested under the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act, 2018 for marrying a woman of a different religion. The Court emphasised that when both families have approved the marriage, the state has no reason to object.
The case began after an FIR (No. 609/2024) was registered at Rudrapur Police Station, District Udham Singh Nagar on 12 December 2024. Aman was charged under Sections 3 and 5 of the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act and Sections 318(4) and 319 of the Indian Penal Code, 2023. He remained in custody for nearly six months.
Earlier, the Uttarakhand High Court had rejected Aman's regular bail plea. Challenging this decision, he approached the Supreme Court. A bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma heard the appeal.
The senior counsel for the appellant argued that "the appellant has married a woman of another religion with the full consent of both the families. The marriage was fixed, not forced. After the marriage, some individuals and organisations exerted pressure, due to which the FIR was registered." The lawyer further said that Aman and his wife want to live peacefully, even separately from their families if needed, and sought bail accordingly.
The state counsel opposed the plea, but failed to convince the bench.
Citing the judgment, the Court said:
“We hold that the respondent-State cannot have any objection to the appellant and his wife living together, as they are married as per the wishes of their respective parents and families.”
The Court also clarified that the ongoing criminal proceedings should not interfere with the couple’s choice to live together.
“The pendency of criminal proceedings against the appellant will not come in the way of the appellant and his wife living together of their own free will.”
Considering the facts and the detention period of six months, the Supreme Court found merit in the bail plea.
Read also: Kapil Sibal raises concern over delay in action on impeachment motion against Justice Shekhar Yadav
In its final direction, the Court said:
“The appellant shall be produced before the concerned trial court as soon as possible, and the trial court shall release him on bail subject to such conditions as it may deem fit.”
The Court also cautioned:
“Any breach of the conditions shall render the bail granted to the appellant void.”
With these observations and directions, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal.
Case Title: AMAN SIDDIQUI ALIAS AMAN CHAUDHARY ALIAS RAJA VERSUS STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Appearance:
For Petitioner(s): Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Sr. Adv. Ms. Manjula Gupta, AOR Mr. Sudhir Kumar Santoshi, Adv. Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar, Adv.
For Respondent(s): Mr. Siddharth Sangal, AOR Ms. Richa Mishra, Adv. Ms. Mushkan Mangla, Adv.
