Smt. Safiya Sultana thru. husband Abhishek Kumar Pandey &Anr vs. State Of U.P. thru. Secy. Home, lko. &ors (Habeas corpus no.16907 of 2020) - Synopsis
Team SoOLEGAL 23 Jun 2021

A habeas corpus petition was filed by Smt. Sultana through Abhishek Kumar Pandey her husband, which said that she had converted her religion from Muslim to Hindu and renamed herself as Simran. The petitioner and her husband got married as per Hindu rituals. Sultana’s father did not permit her to live with her husband despite of them being adults and duly married. But, as the court stated that his custody was illegal, the father accepted Sultana’s decision of living with her husband. The couple further submitted before the court that the 30 day notice under the Special Marriage Act that was needed to be published also invited objections from public was an invasion of their privacy. This would also bring social interference in their personal lives. The issue before the court was the elucidation of Sections 5, 6 and 7 of the Act of 1954 and if with evolution the said sections remain mandatory in nature or not.


The court made it optional for the parties topublish under Section 6get their notice of intention under Section 5of the Act to be It was added, that if no request was made by the parties for publication the Marriage Officer shall move ahead and solemnize the marriage. Even though the parties were given the discretion to publish their notice, the Marriage Officer had the power to verify the details which were submitted by the parties and their competence to marry. I case of any doubt, the officer was authorised to call for investigation and proofs. The intention of the notice, its procedure under Section 6 and Section 7 when read with Section 46 should uphold the fundamental rights instead of violation. The court declared, that, if any party is opting for publication “such publication of notice and further procedure would not be violative of their fundamental rights as they adopt the same of their free will. Therefore, the requirement of publication of notice under Section 6 and inviting/entertaining objections under Section 7 can only be read as directory in nature, to be given effect only on request of parties to the intended marriage and not otherwise.”Therefore, the court mandates serving of notice under Section 5. 

×

C2RMTo Know More

Something Awesome Is In The Work

0

DAYS

0

HOURS

0

MINUTES

0

SECONDS

Sign-up and we will notify you of our launch.
We’ll also give some discount for your effort :)

* We won’t use your email for spam, just to notify you of our launch.
×

SAARTHTo Know More

Launching Soon : SAARTH, your complete client, case, practise & document management SAAS application with direct client chat feature.

If you want to know more give us a Call at :+91 98109 29455 or Mail info@soolegal.com