PIL seeks to do away 30-day notice under Special Marriage Act, HC seeks govt response

The Delhi high court Wednesday sought the response of the Centre and the Delhi government on a plea by an interfaith couple, challenging provisions of the Special

The Delhi high court Wednesday sought the response of the Centre and the Delhi government on a plea by an interfaith couple, challenging provisions of the Special Marriage Act (SMA) that mandate a 30-day public notice, inviting objections to the marriage being registered under the Act.

HT Image

A bench of chief justice DN Patel and justice Prateek Jalan issued a notice to the ministry of law and the Delhi government, seeking their stand on the petition which contends that the 30-day notice period “discourages interfaith couples from getting married”.

Appearing for the petitioners, their counsel Utkarsh SIngh told the court that there is no such provision under personal laws with regard to same faith marriages. He contended that the 30-day notice period inviting objections to the marriage directly impinges on the fundamental rights of the petitioners.

“The issue of whether either party has a living spouse, which can be raised as an objection under Section 4 of the Act, is not a condition imposed on same faith marriages,” the petition said.

The petition also sought the court to declare as “illegal, null, void and unconstitutional” the provisions of the Act which lay down the procedure for the 30-day notice.

Singh also sought a direction to the Centre and Delhi government to decide on the objections, under the Act, on the basis of undertakings and certificates, issued by any government hospital or any other competent authority.

However, opposing the plea, Central government standing counsel, Monica Arora, told the court that similar pleas have been filed by an NGO, Dhanak for Humanity, and it appears to be behind the present petition as well.

The court said since the petition raises legal issues which need consideration, the government should file a reply mentioning the objections. It asked Arora to file a reply and posted the matter for further hearing to November 27.