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point established in the judgment is that the Special Marriage Act, 1954 is a complete code in itself and cannot be superseded by the Rules of 2006, emphasizing the independence of Section 16 of the Act of 1954 in respect to the right of the parties.

JUDGMENT :

Goutam Bhaduri, J.

Heard.

1. The peculiar circumstances of this case gave rise to filing of this appeal against the order dated 22.07.2022 (Annexure A-1) passed by the learned Family Court, Raipur wherein an application preferred by the appellant for registration of his marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 was rejected by suggesting the appellant to approach the 'choice centre' to get marriage registered under the C.G. Compulsory Registration of Marriage Rules, 2006 (henceforth referred to as ' Rules of 2006 )

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the C.G. Compulsory Registration of Marriage Rules, 2006 was framed under a specific object pursuant to the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Smt. Seema V. Ashwani Kumar, AIR 2006 SCC 1158 : 2006 (2) AIR Bom R 783. He would submit that reading of the said Rules over and above Special Marriage Act, 1954 (henceforth referred to as ' Act of 1954 ) would be completely misplaced, as the Act of 1954 is a code in itself, which provides for registration of marriage and no nexus to the Rules of 2006. He would therefore submit the right which is created under a statute cannot be delegated to such Rule of 2006 as the certificate issued under the Act of 1954 has a special significance which has its footing in different international forums. During the course of hearing, he placed on record a certificate of marriage issued under the Act of 1954 by the Court of Collector & Special Marriage Officer, Bilaspur in the State of C.G. and submits that accordingly the marriage certificate should have been issued as the appellant and the lady to whom he married are entitled under the Act of 1954 to get a certificate. He further submits that the order passed by the learned Family Court is completely mis-placed by not appreciating the actual law involved in the subject issue.

3. Per contra, learned State counsel would submit that for registration of marriage, the Rules of 2006 have been framed by the State of C.G. and the appellant can very well apply under that law. He further submits that application for registration of marriage filed by the appellant has not been refused but it has been referred to apply before the choice centre to get a certificate of marriage under Municipal Laws. He further submits that there is no adverse order against the appellant, consequently, this appeal has no merit.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the orders both of the learned Family court and also the order passed by the learned Marriage Officer, Raipur dated 22.10.2021.

5. Perusal of the records would show that an application was field by the appellant for registration of marriage under the Act of 1954.

6. Section 16 of the Act of 1954 purports that on receipt of the application signed by both the parties to the marriage for the registration of their marriage under the Chapter the Marriage Officer should give public notice and thereafter after following the procedure which is laid down under Section 15 enter a certificate of marriage in the Marriage Certificate Book, thereafter, the procedure would be completed. The effect of registration of marriage is described under section 18 of the Act of 1954 which purports that when a certificate of marriage is finally entered in the Marriage Certificate Book under this Chapter, the marriage shall, as from the date of such entry, be deemed to be a marriage solemnized under the Act of 1954.

7. For sake of brevity Sections 16 and 18 of the Act of 1954 is reproduced herein under:-

"16. Procedure for registration.-Upon receipt of an application signed by both the parties to the marriage for the registration of their marriage under this Chapter the Marriage Officer shall give public notice thereof in such manner as may be prescribed and after allowing a period of thirty days for objections and after hearing any objection received within that period, shall, if satisfied that all the conditions mentioned in section 15 are