SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Cal) 1388

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, J.
Ruma Dutta Alias Ruma Roy - Petitioner
Versus
The State of West Bengal and Anr. - Respondents
WPO No. 1479 of 2023
Decided On : 09-08-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sayak Chakraborti, Mr. Wrickbrata Roy.

IMPORTANT POINT
The Special Marriage Act, 1954 allows for a marriage between an Indian national and a foreign national held within India, and the online form for marriage registration should accommodate foreign nationals.

Headnote:

Special Marriage Act, 1954 - Marriage of Indian citizen with foreign national - Interpretation of Section 4 and Section 1 - Court directs respondents to accept petitioner's application for marriage with a foreign national and to rectify online form to accommodate foreign nationals

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, an Indian citizen, seeks to marry a person who is a citizen of a foreign country under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. The online application for registration of the marriage did not have an option for foreign nationals.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the Special Marriage Act, 1954 is the only relevant statute for a marriage between an Indian national and a foreign national held within India. The court directed the respondents to accept the petitioner's application for marriage with a foreign national and to rectify the online form to accommodate foreign nationals.

Issues: Interpretation of Section 4 and Section 1 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, and the availability of options for foreign nationals in the online application form for marriage registration.

Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted Section 4 and Section 1 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 to conclude that the Act allows for a marriage between an Indian national and a foreign national held within India. The court directed the respondents to accept the petitioner's application for marriage with a foreign national and to rectify the online form to accommodate foreign nationals.

Final Decision: The court directed the respondents to accept the petitioner's application for marriage with a foreign national and to rectify the online form to accommodate foreign nationals.

JUDGMENT :

1. Despite service, none appears for the respondents.

2. The affidavit of service filed today be kept with the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who is an Indian citizen, seeks to marry a person who is a citizen of a foreign country under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. However, while trying to fill up the online application for registration /solemnization of the marriage, under the head "Nationality", the petitioner found only two options, "Indian" and "NRI".

4. It is submitted that since the intended spouse of the petitioner does not fall within either of the categories, a third column ought to have been introduced for foreign nationals.

5. Learned counsel places reliance of the language of the Section 4 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, which contemplates that “any two persons” may contract a marriage under the said Act.

6. Learned counsel also places reliance on a decision of a learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court, reported at 2023 SCC OnLine Del 187 [Arushi Mehra and Another Versus Govt. (NCT of Delhi) and Another], where the learned Single Judge held that marriage can be solemnized between two parties under the 1954 Act even if the said persons were not Indian citizens.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration of his argument, to stress the contradistinction between the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act, 1959, places Section 4 of the latter statute, which provides for marriage being contracted between the parties in a foreign country, where at least one of the parties is a citizen of India.

8. A comparison of the two statutes, that is, the Special Marriage Act, 1954 and the Foreign Marriage Act, 1959, as rightly pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner, indicates that the only relevant statute available, when an Indian citizen seeks to enter into a nuptial bond with a foreign national, is the Special Marriage Act.

9. In the event the marriage is held within the territorial jurisdiction of India, the Foreign Marriage Act does not confer any jurisdiction, since the same only pertains to such marriage when it is contracted in a foreign country.

10. Hence, by specific exclusion, the Special Marriage Act is the only remaining statute in India which provides for a marriage between an Indian national and Foreign national, if held within the confines of India.

11. That apart, as held in the judgment of the Delhi High Court cited by the petitioner, the expression “between any two persons” under Section 4 of the 1954 Act sheds sufficient light on the fact that there is no other fetter, than those stipulated in the subsequent part of Section 4 of the said Act, for marriage to be contracted between an Indian national and a Foreign national under the said Act.

12. For the sake of comprehensiveness, we are required to look into the Section 1 of the 1954 Act as well. The same stipulates that the Act extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir and applies also to citizens of India domiciled in the territories to which the Act extends who are in the State of Jammu and Kashmir.

13. However, nothing in the said provision puts a fetter on a marriage of the type as in the present case, to be contracted under the said Act. The only condition is that the marriage is required to be held in India, since the Act operates to the whole of India and not abroad.

14. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to the relief as prayed for.

15. Accordingly, WPO/1479/2023 is disposed of by directing the respondents to ensure that the petitioner's application for solemnization of marriage with a foreign national is accepted, if necessary manually, in order to enable the petitioner to accommodate the foreign nationality of her intended spouse.

16. Since a foreign national does not have an Aadhar Card or Aadhar number, which is required to be given in the present format of the application, the respondent no.2 shall also permit the petitioner to file the applicat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top