Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 29007
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
V. G. Arun, J
SHALINI PRABHAKAR – Appellant
Versus
THE SUB REGISTRAR, SASTHAMANGALAM – Respondent
WP(C)/31712/2022
VINOD RAJKUMAR, NAVEEN RADHAKRISHNAN
Notarized affidavits can substitute single status certificates for marriage registration when obtaining the latter is impractical.
Headnote:
Marriage - Petition for Solemnisation - Special Marriage Act, 1954; Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Fees and Oaths), Act, 1948 - The court emphasizes the acceptability of notarized affidavits to prove single status in lieu of a single status certificate.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed a notice of intended marriage, but the Marriage Officer required a single status certificate from the second petitioner, an Indian but Portuguese citizen. The petitioner presented an affidavit affirming his single status, which the officer refused to accept.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that producing a single status certificate was impossible due to laws in the UK and highlighted a precedent case supporting the acceptance of a notarized affidavit.
Issues: Whether a notarized affidavit can be accepted in place of a single status certificate for the purpose of marriage solemnisation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that an affidavit attested in accordance with legal provisions is a valid substitute for the single status certificate, which is impractical to obtain.
Final Decision: Directing the Marriage Officer to accept the affidavit and proceed with the marriage solemnisation.
JUDGMENT
The petitioners are desirous of getting married and have filed Exhibit P5 notice of intended marriage before the 1st respondent Marriage Officer. The 2nd petitioner is an Indian born Portuguese citizen and Overseas Citizen of India card holder. Hence, in order to prove his single status, the 2nd petitioner has submitted Exhibit P6 affidavit, apostilled by a Notary Public in England and Wales, before the Marriage Officer. The 1st respondent having refused to take steps for solemnisation of the petitioners’ marriage on the premise that the 2nd petitioner has to produce a single status certificate instead of Exhibit P6 affidavit, this writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the 1st respondent to accept Exhibit P6 affidavit and take appropriate steps for solemnisation and registration of the petitioners’ marriage.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that it is impossible to obtain and produce the single status certificate, since the laws pertaining to marriage in the United Kingdom do not provide for the issuance of such certificate. It is in such circumstances that the 2nd petitioner produced Ext.P6, affirming his single status. It is submitted that the issue is covered by the decision of this Court in Shan S and Another v. Marriage Officer [ 2022 (5) KHC 140 ].
3. I find the submissions to be well founded. InShan S., this Court had occasion to consider a similar question. After detailed consideration it was declared that the marriage between an Indian and a foreign citizen can be solemnised if the foreign citizen produces an affidavit attested/notarised in the manner provided in Section 3 of the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Fees and Oaths), Act, 1948. Here, the 2nd petitioner has produced Exhibit P6 affidavit, affirming that he is single and has not married before. In such circumstances, it is only appropriate to accept and act upon Exhibit P6 affidavit, which is duly authenticated, rather than requiring the 2nd petitioner to perform the impossible condition of producing a single status certificate.
In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to accept Exhibit P6 affidavit in lieu of the single status certificate and take further steps for solemnisation of the petitioners’ marriage in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act , 1954.
