The petitioner, an Indian citizen, desires to enter into a marriage with one Satu Anniina, who is a Finnish citizen. The petitioner, residing under the jurisdiction of the 3rd respondent, made an application for contracting the marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. An objection was raised by the 3rd respondent, allegedly on the ground that the marriage is intended to be entered into with a Finnish citizen and, hence, the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 cannot be invoked.

2. In fact, the said issue was already considered by this Court in Rajeev v. State of Kerala [2001 (1) KLT 578], which relied on a decision of High Court of Himachal Pradesh in Marian Eva v. State of Himachal Pradesh [AIR 1993 Himachal Pradesh 7]. This Court categorically found that the Special Marriage Act does not contain any prohibition for solemnisation of the marriage, if one of the parties is a foreigner. Another learned Single Judge of this Court also found to the same effect in Exhibit P5 judgment.

3. A reading of the provisions of the Special Marriage Act would also indicate that, Section 4 contemplates, marriage between “any two persons” to be solemnized under the Act; if the c