Supreme Court directs but will the Govt bite the bullet?

Jump to Comments

In response to a petition filed by Seema, a divorced woman, seeking compulsory marriage registrations, the Supreme Court directed all states and union territories to bring in suitable legislation within three months to make registration of marriage compulsory irrespective of religion. The woman’s former husband had refused to pay her alimony claiming that they were never married. The petitioner’s counsel, Balraj Diwan, said the man was taking advantage of the fact that the marriage was never registered. The court asked the states and UTs to file a compliance report along with an affidavit after the three months deadline. Several states had made registration of marriage compulsory only for the members of the Hindu community (it seems that only Hindu women are oppressed). It asked the Union Government to give publicity to this order and said the public could give their objections within a month. The new rules should be notified after taking into consideration their objections. So far, only inter-faith marriages are required to be registered in India. According to the honourable court, the Centre and the States should incorporate appropriate provisions for the consequences of non-registrations and false declaration during the registration of marriage.
This has led to protests from the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (I am sure no govt can afford to annoy an important vote bank). The board thinks it is interference in the personal law. Although I think it should be easier for Muslims to register their marriages because in any case they register it with the Qazis. I heard a personal Law board member commenting on TV that the marriage certificate is like a birth certificate. It is important to have a birth certificate, but if you don’t have one, it doesn’t mean you are not born. In the same way if you don’t have a marriage certificate it doesn’t mean you are not married.

The views of the National Commission for Women are that compulsory registration would be of critical importance to prevention of child marriages and marriages without the consent of parties. It could help check bigamy because it won’t be possible for men to deny marriage. Registering marriage would mean that the law of minimum age of marriage would be adhered to, as one would be obliged to give one’s age at the time of the wedding. Married women will be able to claim their right to live in the matrimonial houses. It could deter men from deserting women after marriage, and parents and guardians from selling daughters/young girls to any person including a foreigner under the garb of marriage (a number of cases have been reported from Hyderabad). Registration of marriages would facilitate disposal of litigation relating to marriage and prove to be a major relief to women fighting for maintenance on break-up of marriages. This judgement could have far reaching consequences in terms of protecting the rights of married women.

11 Comments

Filed under Democracy, Human rights, Law, Marriage, Marriage registeration, Minorities, Supreme court, justice, women rights