Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/15736/2010 2/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 15736 of
2010
=========================================================
SUKETA
HASMUKHBHAI PATEL & 1 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT THROUGH & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
MTM HAKIM for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2.
MR JK SHAH, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 09/12/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. Heard,
Shri. M.T.M. Hakim, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. J.K.
Shah, learned AGP, for respondent Nos. 1 and 2, on advance copy.
2. From
a perusal of the material on record, it emerges that the petitioner
Nos. 1 and 2, both are above 21 years of age. They, however, belong
to different communities. They have decided to get married, without
changing their religions. They, therefore, applied to the Marriage
Registrar, Vadodara, for solemnizing their marriage, under the
Special Marriage Act, 1954(for short ‘the Said Act’). Notice under
Section-5 of the said Act was issued, on, or around, 22.09.2010.
3. As
per the provisions of the said Act, such notice is to be published by
affixing a copy thereof on a conspicuous place of the Office of
Marriage Registrar. Section-7 of the said Act pertains to the
objections to such a marriage.
4. It
appears that father of petitioner No.1, girl, has objection to such
intercaste marriage. He has, therefore, raised objections, in
writing, before the Marriage Registrar, on 04.10.2010. Upon perusal
of the said document, it would emerge that his objections are that
the petitioners have not taken consent of their elders. They belong
to different religions, they, therefore, cannot enter into a marriage
without, at least, one of them getting converted to the religion of
the other. Since, they belong to different communities, it would not
be possible for them to live happily. If the marriage is solemnized,
there is likelihood of communal tension between the two communities.
The Government of Gujarat has also put restrictions on such
intercaste marriages.
5. When
the petitioners inquired with the Registrar of Marriage regarding
their notice, they were informed that, on their notice, the Registrar
has put an endorsement dated 04.10.2010, that objections have been
received from the father of the girl, which are kept on record.
6. Learned
Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Marriage Registrar is
not performing the marriage, under the said Act, simply because the
father of the girl has raised objections. He submitted that the
objections of the father of the girl are totally invalid and on none
of the objections raised, the Registrar can refuse to solemnize the
marriage, under the said Act, since both the petitioners fulfill all
the conditions to enter into a marriage. It is, further, submitted
that none of the objections raised by the father of the girl, fall
under any of the provisions of Section-4 of the said Act, which
provides for conditions for solemnizing a special marriage, under the
said Act. He, further, submitted that, precisely, to enable
solemnization of marriage between the persons belonging to two
different communities, castes, religions, the said Act was enacted.
Both the petitioners, being above 21 years of age, consent of their
parents and relatives is not necessary. There are no restrictions on
intercaste marriages, in particular, in solemnization of marriages
under the said Act.
7. In
support of the above contentions he relied on a decision of the Apex
Court in the case of LATA SINGH VS. STATE OF U.P. &
ANOTHER , reported in 2006 AIR SCW 3499, wherein the Apex
Court has observed that the State Authorities should also facilitate
intercaste marriages and provide necessary protection, if so
required.
8. I
am of the opinion that the Marriage Registrar cannot, indefinitely,
postpone the request of the petitioners, for solemnizing their
marriage, particularly, when Section-14 of the Act provides for three
months validity period of such a notice. After the notice has been
given under Section-5 of the Act and on completion of statutory
period of one month, the Marriage Registrar has to deal with the
objections, if any, received.
9. None
of the objections raised by the father of the girl, prima
facie, would prevent the
Marriage Registrar from solemnizing marriage of the petitioners.
However, these issues must be decided by him, on the basis of
provisions contained in the said Act and, in particular, Section-4 of
the said Act and if it is found that the petitioners fulfill all the
conditions, for entering into a valid marriage under the said Act, he
shall proceed further in terms of the provisions of the said Act and
shall solemnize the marriage of the petitioners. The entire exercise
will be completed, latest by 20TH
DECEMBER, 2010.
10. With
the above observations and directions, this petition is DISPOSED
OF. Direct service is permitted.
(AKIL
KURESHI, J.)
Umesh/
Top