Rajasthan HC allows life convicts to wed at Jodhpur open jail, cites Article 21
Synopsis
In a rare ruling, the Rajasthan High Court has greenlit the marriage of two life convicts — both serving sentences for murder — inside the Mandore Open Air Camp in Jodhpur, holding that the right to a consensual union is a fundamental right under Article 21. The state raised no objection, and the court capped the guest list at 21.
Key Takeaways
The Rajasthan High Court permitted two life convicts to marry at the Mandore Open Air Camp , Jodhpur , on 16 July .
Moolaram (convicted of murder, lodged since 16 February 2017 ) will marry Seema Gadse Gulab , also serving a life term for murdering her husband.
The bench of Justice Dr Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Praveer Bhatnagar held that incarceration cannot extinguish the right to a consensual marriage under Article 21 .
The state government confirmed both convicts wished to marry and raised no objection to the ceremony being held at the open-air camp.
A maximum of 21 family members (including the priest) may attend; all expenses will be borne by Moolaram .
The Rajasthan High Court has permitted two life convicts to solemnise their marriage at the Mandore Open Air Camp in Jodhpur, ruling that the right to enter a consensual marriage is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. The order, passed on 16 July, is among the rare judicial interventions recognising matrimonial rights of incarcerated individuals in India.
Who the Couple Is
Moolaram, a resident of Nagaur serving a life sentence for murder since 16 February 2017, sought temporary suspension of his sentence to marry Seema Gadse Gulab, who is also serving a life term after being convicted of murdering her husband. Seema is currently out on a 40-day parole. According to the state government's report placed before the court, both convicts expressed willingness to marry and acknowledged they had been in a live-in relationship.
What the Court Ruled
A division bench of Justice Dr Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Praveer Bhatnagar disposed of the petition filed by Moolaram, holding that convicted prisoners cannot be stripped of the right to a consensual marriage solely on account of incarceration. The bench observed that marriage is a fundamental social institution and that permitting the union would advance the goals of rehabilitation and reintegration into mainstream society.
The court relied on an earlier Rajasthan High Court judgment that had recognised the rights of prisoners to marry and procreate as part of fundamental rights under Article 21 — lending this order the weight of precedent rather than an isolated exception.
Conditions Set by the Court
The High Court directed that a maximum of 21 family members from both sides — including the officiating priest — would be allowed entry into the Mandore Open Air Camp for the ceremony. Any request to increase the number of attendees is to be decided by prison authorities. The couple must inform the prison administration well in advance of the chosen wedding date. All expenses related to the ceremony will be borne by Moolaram.
The state's public prosecutors informed the court that the government had no objection to the marriage being held at the open-air camp, provided it conformed to prison rules — a position that smoothed the path for the bench's order.
Significance and Broader Context
This comes amid a gradual judicial evolution in India around prisoners' rights, where courts have increasingly interpreted Article 21 expansively to cover dignitary rights beyond mere physical liberty. Open-air prisons, designed to ease the transition of long-term convicts back into society, have become the preferred setting for such rehabilitative measures. Notably, Moolaram's counsel, Advocate Kaluram Bhati, argued that the marriage would enable both convicts to build a stable family life post-release — an argument the court accepted.
The order sets a persuasive reference point for similar petitions across other high courts, where the intersection of incarceration and personal rights remains legally unsettled.
Point of View
Yet petitions like Moolaram's still require High Court intervention — suggesting institutional inertia rather than principled policy. Courts expanding Article 21 to cover prisoners' matrimonial rights is welcome, but without a codified framework, each such right must be individually litigated, placing the burden squarely on convicts who rarely have adequate legal representation. The real question is whether the legislature will follow the judiciary's lead and formalise these rights in prison reform law.
NationPress
16 Jul 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did the Rajasthan High Court allow life convicts to marry in jail?
The court ruled that the right to a consensual marriage is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. It held that convicted prisoners cannot be denied this right solely because they are incarcerated, and noted that permitting the marriage would support rehabilitation and reintegration.
Who are the two convicts permitted to marry?
The male convict is Moolaram, a Nagaur resident serving a life sentence for murder since 16 February 2017, currently lodged at the Mandore Open Air Camp in Jodhpur. The female convict is Seema Gadse Gulab, also serving a life term after being convicted of murdering her husband; she is currently on a 40-day parole.
What conditions did the court impose on the prison wedding?
The High Court capped attendance at 21 family members from both sides, including the officiating priest. The couple must notify prison authorities well in advance of the wedding date, and all ceremony expenses must be borne by Moolaram. Any increase in the guest count is subject to prison authority approval.
Did the Rajasthan government object to the marriage?
No. The state government confirmed in its report that both convicts wished to marry and acknowledged their live-in relationship. Public prosecutors told the court the government had no objection, provided the ceremony complied with prison rules.
Does this ruling set a legal precedent for prisoners' right to marry in India?
The bench relied on an earlier Rajasthan High Court judgment recognising prisoners' rights to marry and procreate under Article 21, giving this order the backing of precedent. While it is persuasive rather than binding on other high courts, it adds to a growing body of judicial opinion expanding dignitary rights for incarcerated individuals in India.
