Hindu Marriage Doesn't Become Invalid Merely Because It Is Not Registered: Allahabad High Court

The court added that while the State Governments are empowered to make rules for registering such marriages, their purpose is only to furnish 'convenient evidence of marriage', and the violation of this requirement doesn't affect the validity of a Hindu marriage.

A bench of Justice Manish Kumar Nigam made this observation while allowing a petition filed by Petitioner (Sunil Dubey) challenging the Family Court's order rejecting his plea seeking exemption from filing the marriage registration certificate in divorce proceedings under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Case in brief

The petitioner and his wife had jointly filed a petition for divorce by mutual consent on 23 October 2024. During the proceedings, the Family Court directed them to file their marriage certificate.

Since the marriage was solemnised in June 2010, it was never registered, and hence, the husband moved an application seeking exemption from filing the certificate. It was contended that registration is not mandatory under the Act of 1955. The wife also supported this application.

Referring to Rule 3(a) of the Hindu Marriage and Divorce Rules, 1956, the Family Court rejected the plea, noting that a marriage certificate must be annexed to every proceeding under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Challenging the order of the family court, the husband moved the HC, contending that Section 8 of the 1955 Act provides for registration of marriage, but the marriage is not invalidated for want of registration.

The counsel for the petitioner further submitted that since the petitioner's marriage was solemnized in June 2010, the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Marriage Registration Rules, 2017 will not apply to this marriage.

High Court's order

At the outset, the High Court noted that there was no requirement for registration of Hindu marriages before the commencement of the 1955 Act, and generally, Hindus do not get their marriages registered, unlike adoption, transfer of property, and partition.

It added that the State Government has been authorised to make the rules regarding marriage registration, and the UP Government had indeed come up with the marriage registration rules of 2017, which clearly state that any marriage solemnized prior to the commencement of this Rule or after the commencement of this Rule will not be illegal for want of registration.

The Court also referred to sub-Section (5) of Section 8 of the 1955 Act to note that omission to make an entry in the marriage register does not affect the validity of the marriage.

Thus, the bench highlighted, notwithstanding any Rules made in pursuance of the provisions in sub-Section (1) to (4) of Section 8 of the Act, 1955 and due to failure to make an entry of the marriage in the register, the validity of the marriage is not affected.

"When a Hindu marriage is solemnized in accordance with the provisions of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in order to facilitate proof of such marriage by Section 8(1) of the Act, 1955, the State Governments are empowered to make rules for registration of such marriage. Such Rules may provide for keeping over Hindu Marriage Register wherein parties may record the particulars of their marriage in such manner and subject to such condition as may be prescribed. The purpose of registration is only to furnish a convenient evidence of marriage", the Court noted.

The Court clarified that a registration certificate is only a piece of evidence to prove the marriage, and the absence of registration of marriage will not invalidate the marriage in view of Subsection 5 of Section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

In this regard, the bench referred to the Supreme Court's 2014 judgment in the case of Dolly Rani v. Manish Kumar Chanchal 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 334 as well as the Allahabad HC's April 2025 ruling in the case of Maharaj Singh vs. State of U.P. and Another 2025 LiveLaw (AB) 133.

When considering the facts of the case, the bench noted that the requirement of filing a registration certificate as per sub-Rule (a) of Rule 3 of Rules, 1956, arises only where the marriage has been registered under this Act.

The Court further noted that in the present case, the marriage solemnized in 2010 is not registered, and therefore, there is no necessity of filing a registration certificate.

Against this backdrop, the Court termed the insistence by the Principal Judge, Family Court, for filing the marriage certificate as 'wholly uncalled for' and therefore, the order passed by the court was set aside.