IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Rebello F.I. & Savant R.M., JJ.
Swati Anil Sakpal - Petitioner.
Versus
State of Maharashtra - Respondents.
Writ Petition No. 1980of 2007
Decided on 23-3-2007
Advocates appeared:
D.D. Ramanaware, for petitioner.
P.P. Kakade, for A.G.P., for respondents.
Marriage Registration - Widows - Constitutional Validity of Section 6 of Maharashtra Regulation of Marriage Bureaus and Registration of Marriages Act, 1998
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a widow, sought to challenge the constitutional validity of section 6 of the Maharashtra Regulation of Marriage Bureaus and Registration of Marriages Act, 1998, as she was denied admission to a full-time course for widows due to the requirement of producing a marriage registration certificate.
Finding of the Court:
The court interpreted section 6(1) and (2) to allow the widow to apply for marriage registration if the husband fails to do so, thereby upholding the constitutional validity of the section. The court directed the authorities to treat the death certificate as evidence of the marriage and allow the petitioner to pursue the course.
Issues: Constitutional validity of section 6 of the Maharashtra Regulation of Marriage Bureaus and Registration of Marriages Act, 1998, denial of admission to the petitioner, and interpretation of marriage registration requirements.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the widow could apply for marriage registration if the husband failed to do so, and the death certificate could serve as evidence of marriage, thereby upholding the constitutional validity of the section.
Final Decision: The court made the rule absolute, directing the authorities to allow the petitioner to pursue the course and read the rules in conformity with the interpretation.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that she was married to the deceased Anil Sakpal on 4.5.1999. The husband expired on 23.2.2006. The petitioner thereafter applied for full time course for seats in D.Ed. courses reserved for widows. The petitioner however, was called upon to produce the marriage registration certificate. The petitioner applied but considering section 6 of the Maharashtra Regulation of Marriage Bureaus and Registration of Marriage's Act, 1998, the same was refused. The petitioner has therefore f1led this petition to challenge the constitutional validity of section 6 and also for other reliefs.
3. Section 6 of the Maharashtra Regulation of Marriage Bureaus and Registration of Marriages Act, 1998 reads as under:
"6. Duty of husband to submit memorandum for registration of marriages (1) (a) : On solemnization of a marriage, it shall be the responsibility of the husband to present, within a period of ninety days fro the date of solemnization of the marriage, a memorandum in the prescribed form before the Registrar within whose jurisdiction the husband ordinarily resides or where either one of the parties ordinarily reside;
(b) the parties and three witnesses to the marriage shall appear in person before the Registrar and sign the memorandum; (c) the memorandum shall be accompanied by such fee and other documents as may be prescribed;
(c) the memorandum shall be accompanied by such fee and other documents as may be prescribed;
(d) the Registrar before whom the memorandum is presented shall, after verification of the identity of the parties and the witnesses in the prescribed manner, register the marriage in the register of marriages;
(e) on registration of the marriage, the Registrar shall issue a certificate of registration of marriage to the parties in the prescribed form.
(2) Any marriage which is not registered within the time limit specified in sub-section (I), may be registered as provided in the said subsection, by the Registrar within whose jurisdiction the parties ordinarily reside, on submission of the memorandum within a period of one year from the date of the marriage along with such penalty, not exceeding rupees one hundred, as may be prescribed.
Provided that, any marriage which is not registered as provided under this subsection may, subject to the provisions of subsection (1) of section 12, be registered at any time as provided in sub-section (1), after changing a penalty not exceeding rupees five hundred, as may be prescribed.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, any marriage which is solemnized before the coming into force this Act and a period of not less than one year has elapsed since its solemnization, and which for any reason has not been registered, may be registered on presentation of a memorandum along with a penalty of one hundred rupees, in relaxation of any of the provisions of this section;
Provided that any marriage solemnized within a period of one year prior to the date of commencement of this Act, shall be registered in accordance with the provision of sub-section (1), on payment of penalty of one hundred rupees."
4. Section 6, on a first reading seems to operate harshly, in case of widows and or for that matter married women. Under section 6 (1) the Statute caste a duty on the husband to register the marriage. sub-section (2) in the event the marriage is not registered, within the time limit specified by sub-section ( 1), can be registered by following the procedure set out therein. The proviso further extends the time for registering the marriage.
The proviso to section 6(1) contemplates registration at any time on payment of penalty not exceeding Rs. 500/-.
In our opinion, though in terms of section 6(1) it is the responsibility of the husband to register the marriage in terms of section 6(1), section 6(2) or for that matter proviso cannot be read to mean that it can only be done by the husband. The language used is "failure"
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.