Kochi: The Kerala High Court has opined that lawmakers should consider whether the provision of 30 days prior notice is still necessary to register a marriage under the Special Marriage Act.
A petition was recently moved before the High Court challenging the provision of the Special Marriage Act, to the extent that it mandates a waiting period of 30 days after submission of the notice of intended marriage.
The writ petition was filed seeking a declaration that the mandatory waiting period is unconstitutional or a declaration that the 30 days period after submission of a notice of intended marriage mentioned in Section 6 and all consequential provisions under the Act are only directory and cannot be insisted upon.
Justice V G Arun, noting that the matter requires detailed consideration, observed: "A lot of changes and liberalisation has taken place even in our customs and practices. Yet another aspect is that a large number of youngsters are employed abroad. Such people come back to their native place only on short vacations and instances are many where the marriage is conducted during the short holidays.
"The Special Marriage Act requires one of the intending spouses to have resided within the territorial limits of the jurisdictional Marriage Officer for at least 30 days before submitting the notice of intended marriage. Thereafter, the intending spouses have to wait for another 30 days to solemnise the marriage. Whether this waiting period is essential in view of the revolutionary changes in the information technology sector and changes in the social setup itself are matters that should engage the attention of the lawmakers."
The petition was moved by a couple aggrieved by the refusal to solemnise their marriage without the 30 days waiting period as mandated under the provision of the Special Marriage Act, 1954.
As reported by Live Law, the first petitioner is employed in Oman and it would only be possible for the second petitioner, who resides in Italy, to go along with the first petitioner after securing a visa only if the marriage was solemnised on or before January 13.
The petitioners approached the Court since that was not possible because of the waiting period of 30 days after submission of the notice of intended marriage as mandated by the provision.
The counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that in view of the vast change in the social milieu from 1954 till date, the Act has to be interpreted progressively. The counsel sought an interim order contending that in the absence of a direction to solemnise the marriage, without insisting on the 30 days period, the writ petition will be rendered infructuous.
However, Assistant Solicitor General for the High Court, S Manu, submitted that the 30 days period prescribed under Section 5 has been incorporated to provide an opportunity to raise objections against the proposed solemnisation and that the statutory provision has been in force for more than half a century and cannot, therefore, be overlooked for granting the interim relief.
(With Live Law inputs)
