Is Your Marriage Registered If Not Then Here is What Allahabad High Court has to Say about Its Validity

In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has clarified that trial courts cannot insist on the submission of a Marriage Registration certificate in mutual divorce cases under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Justice Manish Kumar Nigam held that when a marriage is unregistered but admitted by both parties, courts must not create unnecessary hurdles by demanding a certificate. The Court set aside the order of a Family Court in Azamgarh, which had earlier rejected a plea to waive this requirement.

Background of the Case

The case arose after a husband challenged an order dated July 31, 2025, from the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Azamgarh. The husband and his wife had jointly filed a petition under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking divorce by mutual consent on October 23, 2024.

During the proceedings, the Family Court directed the couple to produce their Marriage Registration certificate. However, the petitioner and his wife filed an application stating that their marriage, solemnized in 2010, was never registered. They argued that Marriage Registration is not compulsory under the Hindu Marriage Act, and therefore, they should be exempted from this requirement. Despite this, the Family Court rejected their plea, relying on Rule 3(a) of the Hindu Marriage and Divorce Rules, 1956. Aggrieved, the husband approached the High Court.

Court’s Analysis on Marriage Registration

Justice Nigam examined Section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which governs Marriage Registration. He highlighted sub-section (5), which clearly states that the validity of a Hindu marriage cannot be affected by the omission to register it. The Court emphasized that the primary purpose of registration is to facilitate proof of marriage, not to determine its validity.

The Court further noted that even where states make Marriage Registration compulsory, no rule can declare a marriage invalid solely because it was not registered. This interpretation aligns with Rule 6(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Marriage Registration Rules, 2017, which explicitly clarifies that non-registration does not render a marriage void.

To reinforce its reasoning, the Court referred to precedents. In Seema (SMT) v. Ashwani Kumar (2006), the Supreme Court held that registration creates a rebuttable presumption of marriage but is not itself proof of validity. Similarly, in Dolly Rani v. Manish Kumar Chanchal (2024), the Apex Court stated that registration only affirms that a valid marriage ceremony under Section 7 has taken place but does not independently confer legitimacy.

Justice Nigam also rejected the Family Court’s reliance on Rule 3(a) of the 1956 Rules, which requires a certified extract from the Hindu Marriage Register. He clarified that this applies only where the marriage has actually been registered under Section 8, which was not the case here.

Procedural Law Should Facilitate Justice

The High Court also invoked an important principle: procedural law must aid justice, not obstruct it. Citing Sangram Singh v. Election Tribunal Kotah (1955), the Court observed that procedure is meant to facilitate justice, not to penalize litigants or create technical barriers.

Since the fact of marriage was admitted by both husband and wife, insisting on a Marriage Registration certificate was unnecessary and unfair. Justice Nigam stressed that courts should adopt a pragmatic approach in matrimonial matters, especially where parties agree to dissolve their marriage by mutual consent.

Decision

Concluding its analysis, the High Court ruled that the Family Court’s insistence on a Marriage Registration certificate was “wholly uncalled for.” It noted that the couple’s marriage, though unregistered, was never in dispute.

Accordingly, the Court allowed the petition, set aside the Family Court’s order dated July 31, 2025, and directed the Family Court in Azamgarh to decide the pending mutual divorce petition expeditiously and in accordance with law.

This judgment reinforces that while Marriage Registration is desirable for evidentiary purposes, it is not mandatory for seeking divorce by mutual consent under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Case details- [Sunil Dubey Vs. Minakshi]