The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad has issued a series of comprehensive, mandatory directions aimed at curbing the registration of child marriages across Uttar Pradesh. In a significant intervention, the Court has barred the practice of registering marriages based solely on Aadhaar cards or school transfer certificates, declaring that such documents are insufficient to establish the minimum legal age for marriage. The ruling, delivered by Justice Tej Pratap Tiwari, emphasizes that the registration of a marriage is not a perfunctory administrative task but a critical statutory safeguard.

The Court’s directive follows a review of Deepak Pal v. State of U.P. , a criminal appeal that brought the deficiencies in the existing marriage registration system to the forefront. During the proceedings, the Court observed that the marriage of the appellant had been registered using only a transfer certificate and an Aadhaar card. Highlighting the legal infirmity of this approach, Justice Tiwari noted that the registration authority failed to fulfill its statutory obligation, as neither document serves as definitive proof of age under the law.

To address this, the Court has established a clear hierarchy of documents that must be utilized to verify the ages of the bride and groom. This framework mirrors the standards set under Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Under this new protocol, preference must be given to birth certificates issued by municipal or panchayat authorities or matriculation/equivalent certificates from a recognized examination board. Other government documents, such as passports or driving licenses, are to be considered only in specific sequences, and medical age determination through an ossification test remains a method of last resort.

Justice Tiwari underscored the broader social necessity of these measures, referencing the Supreme Court's landmark judgment in Smt. Seema v. Ashwani Kumar , which advocated for the compulsory registration of marriages . The Court explained that registration is not merely a record-keeping exercise; it is an essential mechanism for preventing child marriages, ensuring informed consent , and protecting the inheritance and maintenance rights of women. The Court stated, "The issue is therefore not merely whether the date of birth is entered in the marriage register, but whether the process of registration is so structured that it meaningfully verifies age and thereby serves the very purpose for which compulsory registration has been contemplated."

The judgment further clarified that while the Uttar Pradesh Marriage Registration Rules, 2017, rely heavily on online, Aadhaar-based systems, such platforms cannot replace the substantive requirement of verifying the date of birth. Aadhaar authentication confirms the identity of the person appearing before the official, but it does not serve as conclusive proof of birth. The Court explicitly ruled that the registering authority cannot act as a mere "recording office" and must be satisfied that all statutory conditions, including minimum age requirements, are strictly met before issuing a certificate.

To ensure compliance, the Court has ordered a top-down administrative overhaul of the registration process in every district of the state. These directions, which remain in force pending formal amendments to the existing rules, mandate that no marriage application can proceed where age documentation is unverified or where discrepancies are flagged. If the material provided indicates that either party is below the statutory age, the Marriage Registration Officer is now required to immediately stop the process and refer the case to the District Magistrate and the Child Marriage Prohibition Officer for legal action.

The implementation of these guidelines will be overseen by the District Legal Services Authorities. Each District and Sessions Judge, acting as the Chairman of the District Legal Services Authority, is tasked with convening regular meetings with district officials to monitor progress. Additionally, the Court has ordered bi-monthly inspections of registration offices, where samples of registered marriages will be audited to ensure that age verification was conducted in accordance with the newly prescribed hierarchy. The Inspector General of Registration has also been instructed to organize state-level sensitization programs to train registration officers in identifying forged documents and suspected cases of child marriage.

The Court’s stance on the issue is unyielding: "The registering authority therefore had no verified proof of age before it registered the marriage, and thereby did not discharge the duty." By mandating these strict procedural hurdles, the Court aims to eliminate the systemic loopholes that have previously allowed for the registration of child marriages, emphasizing that the sanctity of the registration process is paramount to upholding the rule of law .

This case has also underscored the need for a mandatory discrepancy protocol. In instances where multiple documents suggest conflicting dates of birth, the system is now required to flag the application for review, preventing the automatic generation of a certificate. The onus is now firmly on the Marriage Registration Officer to identify conflicting records, verify the underlying foundations of the entries, and provide written justification for the date of birth accepted.

The Court has directed the Registrar General to communicate these orders to all District Judges across Uttar Pradesh, ensuring that the new protocols are discussed during District Monitoring Cell meetings. The State government has been instructed to ensure that the online registration portal is updated to reflect these mandatory checks, preventing any issuance of certificates until verification is complete.

The matter is scheduled for further consideration on November 27, 2026, by which time the authorities are expected to submit a comprehensive compliance report detailing the implementation of these measures across the state. This report will serve as a crucial barometer for the effectiveness of the judiciary’s intervention in curtailing the systemic registration of child marriages.