NewsClick

NewsClick
  • हिन्दी
  • Politics
  • Economy
  • Covid-19
  • Science
  • Culture
  • India
  • International
  • Sports
  • Articles
  • Videos
search
menu

INTERACTIVE ELECTION MAPS

image/svg+xml
  • All Articles
  • Newsclick Articles
  • All Videos
  • Newsclick Videos
  • हिन्दी
  • Politics
  • Economy
  • Science
  • Culture
  • India
  • Sports
  • International
  • Africa
  • Latin America
  • Palestine
  • Nepal
  • Pakistan
  • Sri Lanka
  • US
  • West Asia
About us
Subscribe
Follow us Facebook - Newsclick Twitter - Newsclick RSS - Newsclick
close menu
×
For latest updates on nCOVID-19 around the world visit our INTERACTIVE COVID MAP
Law
Politics
India

Mandatory Publication of Notice of Intended Marriage Under Special Marriage Act Violates Right to Privacy; Allahabad holds it optional

The personal laws, the petitioner said, did not impose any such condition of publication of the notice, inviting and deciding objections before solemnizing any marriage.
The Leaflet
13 Jan 2021
merige

The Allahabad High Court, in a significant judgment, has ruled that the requirement to give public notice for marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 is optional for the parties to the intended marriage.

Justice Vivek Chaudhary held that the interpretation of Sections 6 and 7 read with Section 46 of the Special Marriage Act, containing the procedure of publication of notice and inviting objections to the intended marriage in Act of 1954, has to be such that would uphold the fundamental rights and not violate the same.

“In case the same on their simplistic reading are held mandatory, as per the law declared today, they would invade in the fundamental rights of liberty and privacy, including within its sphere freedom to choose for marriage without interference from state and non-state actors, of the persons concerned”, held Justice Chaudhary.

Justice Vivek Chaduhary.

The Court referred to various decisions of the Supreme Court namely Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) and another vs. Union of India and others; Navtej Singh Johar and others vs. Union of India; Shakti Vahini vs. Union of India and others, on the Right to privacy and right to life and said it would be cruel and unethical to force the present generation living with its current needs and expectations to follow the customs and traditions adopted by a generation living nearly 150 years back for its social needs and circumstances, which violates fundamental rights recognized by the courts of the day.

“There is a long chain of decisions growing stronger with time and firmly establishing personal liberty and privacy to be fundamental rights including within their sphere right to choose a partner without interference from State, family or society”, the High Court said.

It also directed to circulate the copy of the judgment to Chief Secretary of the State of U.P. who will forthwith communicate the same to all the Marriage Officers of the State and other concerned authorities as expeditiously as possible for compliance since the matter relates to the protection of fundamental rights of a large number of persons.

The court was hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by the husband of detenue- Safia Sultana, who after converting to Hindu religion and renamed as  Simran, married Petitioner no.2 as per Hindu rituals. However, the father of the woman was not permitting her to live with her husband.

Petitioners said that they could have solemnized their marriage under the Special Marriage Act but the said Act requires a 30 days notice to be published and objections to be invited from the public at large. They expressed that any such notice would be an invasion of their privacy and would have definitely caused unnecessary social pressure/interference in their free choice with regard to their marriage.

The personal laws, the petitioner said, did not impose any such condition of publication of the notice, inviting and deciding objections before solemnizing any marriage.

Last year, the Delhi High Court agreed to examine the petition challenging the provision of issuing a public notice to invite objections to marriages under the Special Marriage Act.

The article was originally published in The Leaflet.

Read the Order

File
Allahabad-HC-Order_Special-Marriage-Act.pdf319.28 KB
Get the latest reports & analysis with people's perspective on Protests, movements & deep analytical videos, discussions of the current affairs in your Telegram app. Subscribe to NewsClick's Telegram channel & get Real-Time updates on stories, as they get published on our website.
Allahabad HC
UP Police
Yogi Adityanath
Special Marriage Act 1954
Related Stories
religion.

Can the State Dictate what Religion you will Follow and who you will Marry?

UP farmer

UP: One Farmer Consumes Poison After Allegedly Failing to Sell Paddy Even Below MSP, Another Burns Crop

sb

AAP MLA Somnath Bharti Arrested in UP, Youth Hurls Ink at Him

UP Farmers Book.

8 UP Farmer Leaders Booked under Goondas Act; Police Continue to Thwart Protests, Put Leaders under House Arrest

Love Jihad.

‘Love Jihad’: ‘Repackaged’ Case and a Shattered Dream

 ‘STOP’ by Aasawari Kulkarni

‘It’s Shameful’: Women’s Groups Slam Yogi Govt over Badaun Rape-Murder Case, Demand Arrest of Accused Priest

stop rape

UP: 50-Year-Old Woman Gang-raped, Killed in Badaun; 2 Accused Arrested, One Absconding

Love Jihad.

SC Notice to UP and Uttarakhand Govt on “Love Jihad” Law; no Stay for the Moment

UP: Adityanath Government ‘Removes’ Over 16,000 Home Guards

UP: Adityanath Government ‘Removes’ Over 16,000 Home Guards

After ‘Love Jihad’, MP to Frame Law Against Stone-Pelting and Damage to Public Property

After ‘Love Jihad’, MP to Frame Law Against Stone-Pelting and Damage to Public Property

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on WhatsAppShare via EmailShare on RedditShare on KindlePrint
Share
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on WhatsAppShare via EmailShare on RedditShare on KindlePrint
Share

Related Stories

Abdul Alim Jafri

UP: No Contract Renewal for Employees Under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Govt. Issues Notice

20 January 2021
Lucknow: On January 15, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government in Uttar Pradesh under Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath has deci
Fahad Zuberi

Love Jihad – Legislation of the Post Truth

17 January 2021
The Love Jihad Law is the best example of our institutions destroying truth, leaving the facts redundant and powerless, and creating not just p
Saurabh Sharma

Badaun Gangrape Not the First Case of Police Lapses in UP; It’s Recurring

14 January 2021
Lucknow: The Badaun district located in the western part of Uttar Pradesh is once again in th

Pagination

  • Next page ››

More

  • Delhi Violence: Media Shouldn’t Destroy ‘Presumption of Innocence’ of Undertrial, Says Court

    Delhi Violence: Media Shouldn’t Destroy ‘Presumption of Innocence’ of Undertrial, Says Court

  • cambride analytica.

    CBI Files Case Against Cambridge Analytica, GSR for ‘Illegal Data Harvesting’

  • nitish kumar

    Bihar: Opposition Slams Govt Decision to Take Action for Social Media Posts Against Ministers, Officers

  • siim

    Three Maharashtra Govt Agencies to Probe Serum Institute Fire in Pune

  • Load More
Subscribe
connect with
about