SDM’S Act Of Issuing Notices For Registration Of Marriage Under Special Marriage Act Prima Facie Contempt Of Court: Delhi HC

BACKGROUND OF THE CASE

• A Muslim woman and a Hindu man wanted to get married last year and therefore applied for registration of their marriage.
• Contradicting the 2009 judgement of the High Court, the SDM issued a notice to the residence of the interfaith couple.
• Following the receipt of the notice, the woman’s father and brother detained her and made her abstain from having any contact with the man she intended to marry.
• After her friend and her husband filed a writ of habeas corpus in the Court, she was produced before the High Court.
• The family of the woman was directed for counselling and the woman’s statement of not being interested to return to her parental house was recorded.

PREVIOUS ORDER

• On April 8, 2009, the High Court had ordered that the matrimonial plans of two adults may be jeopardised by any unauthorised disclosure of their plans, in certain situations. This may lead to parental interference which can endanger the life or limb of one or both parties.
• Thus, the Court had ordered that no marriage officers should dispatch any notices to the residence of applicants who are seeking to solemnise their marriage under the Act.
• But they were allowed to display the notice on the office board.
• The Delhi Government also gave directions to all Deputy Commissioners to inform the Registrar of Marriages under their jurisdiction about the order and ensure the strict adherence to the judicial pronouncement.
• The Court stated that the Special Marriage Act was enacted to enable a special form of marriage for any Indian national professing different faiths or desiring a civil form of marriage and for the protection of the applicants.

OBSERVATIONS OF THE COURT

• The Delhi High Court observed that the Sub Divisional Magistrate’s act of issuing notice to the residence of the couple under the Special Marriage Act, would amount to prima facie contempt of court as it is a clear violation of its earlier directions that were issued in 2009 directing all marriage officers not to dispatch notices seeking solemnization of their marriage under Chapter II of the Act.
• Justice Najmi Waziri held that the respondent, SDM, South West District has acted in a clear violation of the Court’s order and thereby committed contempt of court.
• September 8 has been fixed as the next date for hearing.

DO YOU THINK CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS SHOULD BE ISSUED AGAINST THE SDM?