Woman Moves Delhi HC Against 30-Day Notice Period For Marriage Registration Under Special Marriage Act

The Delhi High Court has directed the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to solemnize the marriage of an inter-faith couple after the woman belonging to the Muslim faith knocked at its doors aggrieved by the mandatory 30-day notice period for inviting objections before a marriage could be registered under Special Marriage Act, 1954.

The woman approached the high court through NGO 'Dhanak of Humanity' which has been working on challenges faced by inter-faith couples.

The NGO and the woman sought quashing of the procedure for applying for registration of marriages under Special Marriage Act, 1954 wherein public notice is issued inviting objections to the marriage for next 30 days saying the same was depriving them the right to life and personal liberty as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Before the court, they pressed that the "30-days period offers an opportunity to kin of the couple to discourage an inter-caste or an inter-religion marriage when it is of paramount importance in the current scenario that couples opting for cross-community marriages are adequately protected".

They also rued the discriminatory provision when registration of marriage under The Hindu Marriage Act,1955 can be attained in a day and signing of a Nikahnama also confers the status of husband and wife on the couple immediately.

The woman and her Hindu partner had approached the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) South East in March but were told to give a notice period of 30 days before their marriage could be registered and also provide an address proof which posed a problem since the woman is from Uttar Pradesh and fled from her house few days before her parents were to forcibly marry her off to a man of the same faith.

On the last hearing, the SDM told a bench of Justice S Ravindra Bhat and Justice Prateek Jalan that since both the parties do not ordinarily reside in Delhi, the computer software was unable to recognize the address for registration of marriage.

The court noted that the woman had been residing in a shelter home in Delhi since February 6 and directed that, "The SDM, Defence Colony shall verify whether the second petitioner (woman) in fact has been residing in (the shelter home) since 06.02.2019 – if that is so, he shall proceed to solemnise the marriage in accordance with law. As regards the petitioners' grievance with respect to the 30 days notice, the application for solemnisation of marriage was made on 11.03.2019".

The bench also noted that provisions under the Special Marriage Act do not visualize sending notices to the respective residential addresses of the parties to the intended marriage and it merely requires pasting of the notice at the office notice board at the concerned office by the SDM.

"The only other impediment would be the issuance of the public notice. In this regard, the court recollects the judgment of this court in W.P.(C)No.748/2009, Pranav Kumar Mishra v. Government of NCT of Delhi decided on 08.04.2009. The court had held that the Act or its provisions do not visualize sending notices to the respective residential addresses of the parties to the intended marriage and it merely requires pasting of the notice at the office notice board at the concerned office by the SDM.

"In the light of the above discussion, the SDM, Defence Colony shall verify the second petitioner's claim of having been residing in Delhi since 06.02.2019, and if so, he shall proceed to solemnise the marriage (given that the notice was issued on 06.02.2019 and that 30 days period had elapsed). The appropriate orders in this regard shall be made as early as possible, preferably within a week," the court ordered.

The matter is now listed for July 29.

In the instant case, the woman has been in love with a Hindu man and fled her house in Uttar Pradesh after facing brutal torture by her own family.

In November 2018, her father had fixed her marriage with a man of the same faith and subjected her to torture when she opposed.

In February, she left her house few days before the scheduled marriage, approached 'Dhanak of Humanity' and took refuge in a shelter home. Following a writ petition filed by her before the Delhi High Court, the Delhi government was directed to give her protection.

In March, she and her partner approached the SDM office who told them about the 30-day notice period.

In her petition, the NGO said the procedure was "a violation of fundamental rights guaranteed in favour of the petitioners under the Constitution of India, primarily through Article 21 'Right to Life and Personal Liberty'.

"The state is not concerned with the marriage itself but with the procedure it adopts which must reflect the mindset of the changed times in a secular nation promoting inter-religion marriages instead of the officialdom raising eyebrows and laying snares and land mines beneath the sacrosanct feet of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 enacted in free India to cover cases not covered by any other legislation on marriages as per choice of parties for a court marriage.

The petition also submits that "the procedural tediousness forces couples to adopt alternate measure of marrying in a religious place of worship or converting to another religion to marriage while also discourages couples from registering their marriage altogether because marriages outside the purview of the Act, remain valid even without registration, or marriage may take place anywhere as the issue of Jurisdiction is not attracted".