Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
VIKRAM NATH, SANDEEP MEHTA, JJ.
Amanjot Singh Chadha – Petitioner
Versus
Union of India & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 911 of 2022
Decided On : 04-09-2025
(A) Anand Marriage Act, 1909 – Section 6 – Registration of Sikh rite [Anand Karaj] – Section 6 discloses a complete legislative scheme – The provision is cast in imperative and identifies facilitative purpose of registration – It requires keeping of a public register with certified extracts, provides for laying of rules before State Legislature, and removes burden of duplicative registration once an entry is made under the Act – It imposes positive duty on every State Government to create a workable registration machinery for Anand Karaj marriages – That duty is not contingent on size of beneficiary group in any jurisdiction, nor can it be deferred on the footing that other marriage laws exist in parallel – Failure to make rules withholds very evidentiary and administrative benefits that Parliament has conferred and frustrates uniform facility 2012 amendment was designed to secure – Availability of registration bears directly on equal treatment and on orderly civil administration – Marriage certificate enables proof of status for residence, maintenance, inheritance, insurance, succession and enforcement of monogamy, and it particularly safeguards interests of women and children who depend on documentary proof to claim legal protections. (Paras 7, 8 and 9)
(B) Anand Marriage Act, 1909 – Section 6 – Registration of Sikh rite [Anand Karaj] – Uneven access to a statutory facility across States and Union Territories produces unequal outcomes for similarly situated citizens – In a secular framework that respects religious identity while ensuring civic equality, law must provide a neutral and workable route by which marriages solemnised by Anand Karaj are recorded and certified on same footing as other marriages – Harmonisation with existing registration regimes is both practicable and necessary – Where a general civil marriage registration framework is in place, it must receive applications for registration of marriages solemnised by Anand Karaj on same footing as other marriages and, if parties so request, it should record that ceremony was by Anand rite – This interim facilitation does not displace specific rule-making contemplated by Section 6 of Act – It prevents denial of certification while formal rules are finalised – In jurisdictions governed by special Constitutional or statutory arrangements that regulate extension of Central enactments, immediate duty is to secure reception and certification without discrimination under prevailing framework, while competent authority considers, in accordance with law, whether and how to extend the Act – This measured course preserves federal comity, avoids prescribing policy content, and gives practical effect to clear legislative command – States and Union Territories directed to secure time-bound performance of rule-making obligation under Section 6 of the Act and require interim facilitation under existing registration mechanisms so that statutory promise of the provision is made effective – Every respondent that has not yet notified rules under Section 6 of the Act shall do so within four months – With immediate effect and until such rules are notified, each respondent shall ensure that marriages solemnised by Anand Karaj are received for registration under prevailing marriage registration framework without discrimination – Respondents that have already notified rules under Section 6 of the Act shall continue to operate them. (Paras 9, 10, 11 and 12)
Facts of the case:
Present writ petition under Article 32 of Constitution of India seeks limited Mandamus directing States and Union Territories to frame and notify rules under Section 6 of Anand Marriage Act, 1909 (as amended in 2012) to facilitate registration of marriages solemnised by Sikh rite commonly known as Anand Karaj. The relief is confined to operationalising statutory mechanism contemplated by Parliament. The limited prayer is that rule-making duty be discharged within a reasonable time so that access to certification and attendant civil consequences is secure and non-discriminatory across jurisdictions.
Findings of Court:
Each respondent shall place on record a brief compliance affidavit within timelines indicated in paragraphs 12 to 14, enclosing relevant notifications, circulars and formats, as the case may be. Union of India shall file consolidated status report contemplated by paragraph 12(v) within six months.
Result : Writ Petition disposed of with directions.
ORDER
1. The fidelity of a constitutional promise is measured not only by the rights it proclaims, but by the institutions that make those rights usable. In a secular republic, the State must not turn a citizen’s faith into either a privilege or a handicap. When the law recognises Anand Karaj as a valid form of marriage yet leaves no machinery to register it, the promise is only half kept. What remains is to ensure that the route from rites to record is open, uniform and fair.
2. The present writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeks a limited mandamus directing the States and Union Territories to frame and notify rules under Section 6 of the Anand Marriage Act, 1909 (as amended in 2012) to facilitate registration of marriages solemnised by the Sikh rite commonly known as Anand Karaj. The relief is confined to operationalising the statutory mechanism contemplated by the Parliament. The limited prayer is that the rule-making duty be discharged within a reasonable time so that access to certification and the attendant civil consequences is secure and non- discriminatory across jurisdictions.
3. The facts giving rise to the writ petition are as follows:
3.2. According to the petitioner, while a number of States and Union Territories have notified rules pursuant to Section 6 of the Act, several others have not yet done so, resulting in uneven access to a uniform statutory facility intended by the amendment.
3.3. Prior to approaching this Court, the petitioner instituted Writ Petition (PIL) No. 98 of 2021 before the High Court of Uttarakhand. By order dated 23 March 2021, the High Court directed the Chief Secretary, State of Uttarakhand, to place the proposal before the Cabinet, and upon approval, to publish the rules in the Gazette and place them before the Legislative Assembly.
3.4. The petitioner thereafter addressed representations dated 8 April 2022, 9 April 2022 and 28 August 2022 to various States and Union Territories seeking formulation/ notification of rules under Section 6 of the Act. A response dated 30 August 2022 from the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir indicated that action was under consideration.
4. Being aggrieved by the continuing non- implementation of Section 6 of the Act in several jurisdictions, the petitioner has approached this Court in public interest under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for directions that the rule- making obligation be discharged within a fixed time and, until such rules are notified, that marriages solemnised by Anand Karaj be received and registered under existing statutory frameworks without discrimination.
5. Having considered the submissions of the petitioner and the counter affidavits placed on record on behalf of some of the Respondent States and Union Territories, the limited question before us is whether this Court should, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, secure the effective implementation of Section 6 of the Anand Marriage Act, 1909 by directing time-bound rule- making and, until such rules are notified, ensuring that marriages solemnised by Anand Karaj are received for registration under the existing statutory arrangements without discrimination.
6. Before we examine the contours of the obligation cast by Section 6 of the Act (as amended in 2012), it is necessary to reproduce the text of this provision for ready reference:
(1) Registration of Sikh rite [Anand Karaj] – In a secular framework that respects religious identity while ensuring civic equality, law must provide a neutral and workable route by which marriages s....
The State is mandated to accept and register Christian marriages under the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872, ensuring legal recognition through civil registration frameworks.
Point of Law : The only condition for registration of marriage as per Rule 6 of Rules, 2008 is that marriage is to be solemnized.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Special Marriage Act, 1954 is a complete code in itself and cannot be superseded by the Rules of 2006, emphasizing the independence of Sec....
Registration of marriage cannot be denied based on the branch's enlistment; laws provide a statutory right to register marriages performed in accordance with Hindu rituals.
The registrar cannot cancel a marriage registration without sufficient proof of an erroneous entry.
Restitution of conjugal rights – Where marriage itself is not proved, decree for restitution of conjugal rights cannot be sustained.
Hindu marriage – Unless and until marriage is performed with appropriate ceremonies and in due form, it cannot be said to be solemnised – Certificate of marriage is a proof of validity of Hindu marri....
(1) Same sex marriage – There is no unqualified right to marriage guaranteed by Constitution – Marriage is a social institution and in our country, it is conditioned by culture, religion, customs and....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
