Actual Marriage Date to Be Included in Special Marriage Certificates

Source:  Kerala High Court   

Why in News? 

Recently, Justice Sobha Annamma Eapen directed the State to modify the PEARL software for marriage registration certificates to include the actual date of marriage celebration, after a couple’s certificate only showed the registration date and not their ceremony date, despite repeated requests. The Court held that omitting the celebration date defeats the purpose of registration under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. 

• The Kerala High Court  held this in the matter of Athul Dini and Anr. v. The District Registrar and Ors. (2025).

What was the Background of Athul Dini and Anr. v. The District Registrar and Ors. (2025) Case ? 

• A married couple, Athul Dini (29) and Athulya Raj (31), approached the Kerala High Court after authorities refused to include their actual marriage date in their registration certificate. Having married on July 10, 2022, according to Hindu customs, they sought registration under Section 15 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, as they were employed abroad and needed the certificate for official purposes. 
• When the Marriage Officer issued their Certificate of Marriage Celebrated in Other Forms (No. 8/2022 dated October 1, 2022), it omitted the actual celebration date of July 10, 2022, showing only the registration date. This was problematic because earlier certificates issued to other couples had included both dates, as evidenced by certificates from 2006, 2008, and 2021 that the petitioners produced. 
• The couple submitted multiple representations—first to the Marriage Officer on October 13, 2022, and then to the District Registrar on October 27, 2022. Both were rejected, with authorities claiming no legal provision existed to include the celebration date in the certificate. 
• The respondents explained that marriage certificates were now generated automatically through PEARL software, designed according to the Special Marriage Act's provisions. They contended that the system didn't permit registering officers to enter celebration dates or modify online-generated certificates. Earlier certificates containing celebration dates were issued manually before the online system's implementation. The authorities maintained they couldn't reissue or alter certificates generated through PEARL software, which had been simplified for faster processing.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The High Court conducted a detailed examination of the Fifth Schedule of the Special Marriage Act, which prescribes the statutory format for such certificates. The Court found clear, unambiguous provision in the prescribed format specifically for including the celebration date, with a designated blank space for this purpose. 
• The Court categorically held that software limitations cannot override statutory requirements. While acknowledging that PEARL software might not include the complete prescribed form, the Court emphasized that this technical deficiency couldn't justify denying the petitioners' legitimate request. The authorities had a bounden duty to immediately correct the software to issue proper, complete certificates. 
• The Court made a crucial distinction between solemnization and registration under Section 15, noting that this provision specifically addresses registration of marriages celebrated in other customary forms, not solemnization under the Act itself. Therefore, the celebration date would necessarily precede the registration date. Without showing the original celebration date, the certificate would be incomplete and force couples to maintain two separate certificates—one from customary practice showing the marriage date and another from the Act showing registration—defeating Section 15's very purpose. 
• The Court observed the irony that despite claims of simplified and speedy processing, the petitioners had to struggle unsuccessfully to obtain a complete certificate, contradicting the respondents' assertions of efficiency. 
• The Court directed the Marriage Officer to issue a fresh certificate including the actual solemnization date of July 10, 2022. Recognizing the broader implications, the Court suo motu impleaded the Additional Chief Secretary and Inspector General of Registration as additional respondents, directing them to immediately modify PEARL software to conform with the Fifth Schedule's prescribed format, ensuring all future applicants receive legally complete certificates. 
• This judgment establishes that administrative convenience and technological limitations cannot justify non-compliance with statutory mandates. It reinforces that digital systems must be designed to fulfill legal requirements, not circumvent them, and that modernization should enhance, not diminish, citizens' statutory rights. 

What are the Sections Referred ? 

• Section 15 - Registration of Marriages Celebrated in Other Forms: 
  • Section 15 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 provides for registration of marriages celebrated in any form (other than under the Special Marriage Act, 1872 or the present Act) by a Marriage Officer, subject to the following conditions: 
    • (a) A ceremony of marriage has been performed and parties have been living together as husband and wife ever since; 
    • (b) Neither party has more than one spouse living at the time of registration; 
    • (c) Neither party is an idiot or lunatic at the time of registration; 
    • (d) Both parties have completed twenty-one years of age at the time of registration; 
    • (e) The parties are not within degrees of prohibited relationship (subject to customary law for pre-commencement marriages); and 
    • (f) The parties have resided within the Marriage Officer's district for at least thirty days preceding the application. 
• Section 18 - Effect of Registration 
  • Section 18 provides that once a marriage certificate is finally entered in the Marriage Certificate Book under Chapter III, the marriage shall be deemed to be a marriage solemnized under the Act from the date of such entry. All children born after the date of the ceremony of marriage shall be deemed legitimate children of their parents. 
  • Proviso: This does not confer property rights upon such children in property of persons other than their parents where they would otherwise have been incapable of such rights. 
• The Fifth Schedule - Prescribed Certificate Format 
  • The Fifth Schedule prescribes the statutory format for "Certificate of Marriage Celebrated in Other Forms" which includes the following critical provision: 
  • "...the said marriage has, this ……… day of 20……, been registered under this Act, having effect as from ________________." 
  • This blank space is specifically designated for mentioning the original date of celebration of the marriage. 
• Article 226 of the Constitution of India: 
  • Article 226 empowers High Courts to issue writs including mandamus, certiorari, prohibition, quo warranto and habeas corpus to any person or authority within their territorial jurisdiction for enforcement of fundamental rights under Part III and for any other purpose.