Registrar Cannot Refuse to Register a Hindu Marriage Because One Spouse Is a Foreign National: Rajasthan High Court

The petitioners, a woman resident in India and a man resident in Belgium, both claiming to be Hindus, say they married by Hindu rites on 18.01.2010, with a certificate from Arya Samaj, Ajmer. On 20.01.2010 they applied for registration; the Registrar orally refused because the husband is a foreigner, not an Indian citizen (paras 5-6). The respondents' reply relied on Section 3 of the Rajasthan Compulsory Registration of Marriages Act, 2009 (para 7). At the hearing the petitioners' counsel had no instructions; the respondents also argued that no valid proof of marriage under Section 5 was produced and the Arya Samaj certificate was invalid (paras 8-9). Given its pendency since 2010, the Court decided the petition without them (para 10).

Section 1(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act extends it to Hindus domiciled in India who are outside it, and Sections 5 and 7 do not require a spouse to be domiciled in India. The Kerala High Court in Vinaya Nair held that domicile cannot be imported into a marriage of two Hindus solemnised in India by Hindu rites (paras 13-14). The Delhi High Court in Bhumika Mohan Jaisinghani, Aryan Arianfar and Arushi Mehra directed registration of foreign nationals' marriages and changes to software, e-portals and guidelines insisting on Indian citizenship (paras 15-18). Section 8 of the 1955 Act nowhere bars a foreign national Hindu from registering a marriage solemnised under Sections 5 and 7, so Section 3 of the 2009 Act is not in consonance with it (para 19). Even the State's own application format has no column barring foreign nationals (para 20). Citizenship is therefore not necessary for registration (para 21). On the second issue, Articles 15, 16, 19, 29 and 30 are reserved to citizens, while Articles 14 and 21 protect any person, as Chandrima Das explains (paras 23-27). Denying registration to the foreign spouse violates his right to equality under Article 14 (para 28).