IMPORTANT POINT
Marriage Online - the registering authority under the Special Marriage Act cannot refuse solemnisation of marriage online.

JUDGMENT

The captioned writ petitions are filed by the petitioners basically seeking a writ of mandamus permitting the petitioners to appear online for registering the marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 (‘Act, 1954’ for short) and to do consequential acts through a power of attorney. Therefore, I heard them together and proposed to pass this common judgment.

2. The petitioners in W.P.(C) No. 1749 of 2023 are citizens of India and they have attained majority. With the intention of getting married under the provisions of the Act, 1954, they gave Exhibit P1 Notice of intended marriage dated 30.12.2022 to the Marriage Officer and Sub Registrar, Piravom, Ernakulam District.

3. The convenient date of marriage was fixed as 30.01.2023 and the first petitioner remitted the requisite fee on 03.01.2023, as is evident from Exhibit P2. According to the petitioners, notice was published in the notice board of the Sub Registry Office as is required under the statute.

4. The case of the petitioners is that the first petitioner was selected for M.Sc Global Logistics Operations and Supply Chain Management at a University in the United Kingdom and the course was scheduled to start physically on 23.01.2023, as is evident from Exhibit P3 confirmation of acceptance for studies details. Therefore, he submitted an application before the Marriage Officer seeking exemption from personal appearance, and requested the respondent to exempt him from appearing in person before the Marriage Officer at the time of marriage, as is evident from Exhibit P4 application dated 09.01.2023.

5. The first petitioner has also appointed one Gopalakrishnan M.K as his power of attorney for the purpose of performing essentials for registering the marriage and has undertaken to appear before the Marriage Officer through any online medium. According to the first petitioner, even though he personally met the Marriage Officer, he insisted that both the petitioners have to appear in person to register the marriage, evident from Exhibit P5 dated 12.01.2023. According to the first petitioner, since he is away in the United Kingdom, he will not be in a position to return within the prescribed period for registering the marriage.

6. The petitioners in W.P.(C) No.1858 of 2023 are permanent residents of Kottayam, evident from Exhibits P1 and P2 aadhaar cards. On 16.01.2023, a notice under Section 5 of the Act, 1954 was given for physically appearing before the Marriage Officer and the Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar, Kottayam District, evident from Exhibit P3. But, fact remains, petitioner No.1 is a graduate in B.Sc Nursing and since March, 2022, she is working at University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, England, U.K as a registered nurse; whereas, the second petitioner is working as Hospitality Manager in Dubai, U.A.E.

7. Therefore, according to the petitioners, in order to register the marriage, Exhibit P3 Notice of intended marriage dated 16.01.2023 was given and there is no other alternative than solemnization of marriage online.

8. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner Shri. Muhammad Shiraz and Sri. Franklin Arackal, learned Senior Government Pleaders Smt. Deepa Narayanan and Smt. Reshmi K.M. and the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India Sri. S. Manu, and perused the pleadings and materials on record.

9. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the question with respect to the validity of solemnization of marriage under the provisions of the Act, 1954 through Video Conferencing was considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Arun R.K. and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors. [2023(1) KLJ 758 = 2023 SCC Online Ker. 817], and after considering the provisions of the Act, 1954, Information Technology Act, 2000 and the proposition of law evolved by the various High Courts, it is held that the marriages under the Act, 1954 can be solemnized online.

10. The learned Senior Government Pleaders submitted that going by the provisions