1. Challenge to order revoking notary licence for attesting marriage affidavits — alleged misconduct under Notaries Act, 1952. (Para 1 , 3 , 5 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(MP) 534
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, C.J., VINAY SARAF, J.
Shri Bhola Prasad Patel – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 4830 of 2026
Decided On : 27-02-2026
Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Shri Jaideep Verma, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Dr S.S. Chouhan, Government Advocate, Shri K.N. Fakhruddin, Advocate
For the Petitioner:Shri Jaideep Verma, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Dr S.S. Chouhan, Government Advocate, Shri K.N. Fakhruddin, Advocate
A Notary is not authorized under Section 8 of the Notaries Act, 1952, to attest documents evidencing the performance of marriage. Attesting marriage affidavits constitutes professional misconduct, justifying the cancellation of the Notary's license and permanent debarment from practice by the appropriate government.
Headnote:(A) The Notaries Act, 1952 - Section 8 and Section 10(d) - The Notaries Rules, 1956 - Rule 13 - Functions of Notaries - Attestation of marriage affidavits - Whether attesting documents evidencing the performance of marriage falls within the purview of a Notary's official functions - Section 8 does not empower a Notary to attest any document evidencing the performance of marriage - Deed of marriage cannot be attested in the style of an affidavit - Performance of a notarial marriage is not a legal marriage in the eye of law - Attesting such documents amounts to purportedly acting as a marriage officer and constitutes misconduct justifying the cancellation of the certificate of practice and permanent debarring from practice (Paras 13, 14, 15 and 16).
Facts of the case:
A Notary challenged the order of the appropriate government which revoked his notary license and permanently debarred him from practicing after an inquiry found he had attested affidavits of marriage. The petitioner contended that attesting affidavits is within his authority under the Notaries Act and that the cancellation was arbitrary and lacked a detailed inquiry.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the documents were not mere affidavits but were executed as deeds of marriage to declare the deponents as husband and wife. The court observed that the statutory functions of a Notary under Section 8 do not include attesting deeds of marriage or divorce. The procedure for inquiry, including the issuance of a show cause notice and recording the satisfaction of the competent authority, was duly complied with under the Notaries Rules.
Issues: Whether the attestation of marriage affidavits by a Notary constitutes a violation of the Notaries Act and whether the subsequent cancellation of the license and permanent debarment from practice was legally sustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: A Notary's authority is limited to the functions specified in Section 8 of the Notaries Act, 1952. Since marriage is not a contract and cannot be performed via a marriage deed or affidavit, any Notary attesting such documents exceeds their legal authority and commits professional misconduct, which provides a valid ground for the appropriate government to cancel their license and permanently debar them from practice.
Result: Petition, being sans merit, is hereby dismissed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
- practice and procedure
- family law
- administrative law
Table of Contents
2. Petitioner: attestation within powers, no violation; procedure not followed. State: attestation of notarial marriage unauthorized; misconduct. (Para 8 , 10 )
3. Documents not mere affidavits but evidence of marriage; notary has no authority to attest marriage deeds; act contrary to law. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 )
4. Section 8 Notaries Act does not empower notary to attest documents evidencing marriage; such act constitutes misconduct justifying cancellation. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 )
5. Petition dismissed; no interference with order revoking notary licence and permanently debarring petitioner from practice. (Para 17 )
6. Can a notary attest an affidavit of marriage as proof of marriage?
No. The Notaries Act does not empower a notary to attest documents evidencing marriage; such an act is contrary to law and constitutes misconduct. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 )
7. What is the procedure for cancellation of a notary's certificate of practice?
Under Rule 13 of the Notaries Rules, 1956, an inquiry must be held, a show cause notice issued, and the notary given an opportunity to be heard before cancellation. (Para 14 , 15 )
ORDER :
Vinay Saraf, J.
1. The present petition is preferred by the petitioner challenging the legality and validity of the order dated 05.01.2026 passed by the Law and Legislative Affairs, Government of M.P., whereby the Notary licence issued in favour of the petitioner was revoked and the petitioner has been permanently debarred from practicing as a Notary.
2 . With the consent of parties heard Shri Jaideep Verma, learned counsel for petitioner and Dr.S.S.Chauhan - Government Advocate for the purpose of final disposal of the case.
3. The petitioner is an enrolled advocate and by order dated 20.12.2000, the petitioner was appointed as Notary and permitted to carry out the practice of Notary at District Headquarter, Rewa for a period of 5 years, which was duly renewed for a further period of 5 years by the Law and Legislative Department, Government of M.P. vide order dated 22.05.2025 till 19.12.2030.
4. In Criminal Appeal No.6417/2024 ( Archana Saket and others Vs. State of M.P. and others ) it was submitted before the Coordinate Bench that appellant Archana had performed a notarial marriage with co-accused Sandeep Saket and the copies of affidavits of marriage duly notarized by the petitioner were produced before the Court by the accused person therein and after examining the same, the Coordinate Bench by order dated 29.10.2025 issued direction to the Principal Secretary, Law and Legislative Department to take action against the petitioner i.e. Mr. B.P.Patel, Notary Rewa (M.P.) for performing notarial marriage on affidavit by holding that this kind of conduct on part of the concerned Notary needs thorough investigation that how Notaries (Public) are misusing their authority and executing documents as proof of marriage and it was further directed that the report be submitted within a period of 30 days.
5. In compliance of directions issued by the Coordinate Bench in Criminal Appeal No.6417/2024 on 29.10.2025, Third Civil Judge, Senior Division, Rewa (M.P.) was appointed as Inquiry Officer, who issued a notice to the petitioner on 06.12.2025 for production of the relevant documents on 08.12.2025. The statement of petitioner was recorded by the Inquiry Officer on 08.12.2025; wherein he admitted attestation of the marriage affidavits executed by Archana Saket and Sandeep Saket. After completing the inquiry, Inquiry Officer prepared an inquiry report on 8.12.2025 and forwarded the same to the Law and Legislative Department, State of M.P., Bhopal, wherein the Inquiry Officer had recorded a finding that the affidavits executed by Archana Saket dated 16.02.2022 and by Sandeep Saket dated 16.02.2022 were attested by the petitioner and the relevant entries in the notary register were available at Serial No.415 and 414 respectively. The Inquiry Officer has also recorded that before the Inquiry Officer, the petitioner admitted that he attested the affidavits of Archana Saket and Sandeep Saket evidencing their marriage.
6. After receipt of the inquiry report, a show cause notice was issued by the Law and Legislative Department to the petitioner on 11.12.2025 by forwarding the copy of inquiry report and granted him opportunity to submit his explanation. Further a detailed report was called from the Principal District Judge, Rewa by the Law and Legislative Department vide its Communication dated 12.12.2025 and the Principal District Judge issued a direction to the Inquiry Officer to submit a report in respect of the execution of other similar documents by the petitioner. The Inquiry officer issued a notice to the petitioner on 16.12.2025 and summoned all the documents of similar nature attested by the petitioner in last 5 years, however, the same were not produced by the petitioner. A detailed reply of the show cause notice was submitted by the petitioner on 18.12.2025; wherein he admitted that documents at Serial No.414 and 415 were attested by him. He submitted that the affidavits were not drafted by him and the affidavits were not of performing
