High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2022-08-10Writ petition disposed of directing the third r...

Asha Mary George and Mithun John Varghese v. State of Kerala and Others

Case / Petition Number:W.P.(C) No.24182 of 2022

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: V.G. Arun
Judgment Date: 2022-08-10
Court Decision / Holding: The writ petition is disposed of directing the third respondent to accept Ext.P7 affidavit in lieu of a single status certificate and to solemnise and register the petitioners’ marriage in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, 1954.
Final Disposition: Writ petition disposed of directing the third respondent to accept Ext.P7 affidavit in lieu of single status certificate and to solemnise and register the marriage under SSA 1954.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Asha Mary George
Mithun John Varghese

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by the Secretary, Department of Registration, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram, PIN-695001
The Secretary, Department of Law, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram, PIN-695001
The Marriage Officer, Office of the Sub Registrar, Sasthamangalam, Thiruvananthapuram, PIN-695010

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sebastian Champappilly
• Annie George

Case Synopsis & Summary

This writ petition before the Kerala High Court concerns a proposed marriage between two petitioners: Asha Mary George, now a UK citizen, and Mithun John Varghese, an Indian citizen. They sought solemnisation of their marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, after furnishing the required thirty-day notice. The crux of the dispute was the Marriage Officer’s insistence on a “single status” certificate from the British Embassy, a document the petitioners assert does not exist in the UK’s governing laws for marriages of its citizens abroad. Petitioner 1 had already obtained a final divorce decree from a UK Family Court (Ext.P1) and petitioner 2 had a prior Indian divorce (Ext.P2). The petitioners relied on Ext.P7, a notarised affidavit by petitioner 1 declaring her single status, arguing that this suffices under notarial practice and relevant statutory provisions (Notaries Act, 1952; Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Fees and Oaths) Act, 1948). They relied on Shan S and another v. Marriage Officer (2022 (5) KHC 140) which held that affangements can be made using such affidavits. The Government Pleader maintains that the government order requiring embassy verification (Order No. J3-80/2021) governs foreign nationals. The Court ultimately accepts Ext.P7 and directs the Marriage Officer to solemnise and register the marriage under the SSA, 1954, relying on existing jurisprudence to avoid an impossible condition.

Provisions of Law Cited

Special Marriage Act, 1954 (Section 5)Notaries Act, 1952 (Section 3)Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Fees and Oaths) Act, 1948 (Section 3)

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners submit that their right to marry cannot be curtailed by insisting on the production of a single status certificate, which UK law does not provide for. Petitioner 1 has affirmed her single status in Ext.P7 notarised affidavit and contends Ext.P7 is valid under the Notaries Act, 1952 and the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Fees and Oaths) Act, 1948. They rely on Shan S and another v. Marriage Officer (2022 (5) KHC 140), which held that a foreign citizen could be married if the affidavit attested/notarised in the manner provided under Section 3 of the 1948 Act. Since both spouses are in India and willing to appear, Ext.P7 should be accepted and acted upon in place of the certificate, enabling solemnisation and registration under SSA, 1954.

Contentions of Respondents

The State, through the Government Pleader, supports the mandatory embassy-based verification for foreign nationals, citing Order No. J3-80/2021 (26 July 2021), which requires non-objection and bachelorhood certificates from the Embassy. The British authorities’ note (Ext.P5) indicates that UK marriage laws do not issue a “single status certificate,” and embassy staff cannot verify marital status. While Shan S is cited, the Department argues that embassy verification remains the governing policy, and the remedy lies in compliance with the embassy procedure or alternative permissible evidence under the SSA to ensure legality and prevent invalid marriages. The court should not override government policy where a certificate is mandated by the order, and the petitioner should demonstrate compliance with existing requirements.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Shan S and another v. Marriage Officer	2022 (5) KHC 140	Positive	The court relies on Shan S to accept an affidavit/notarised under the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Fees & Oaths) Act, 1948 as a substitute for a single-status certificate for foreign nationals seeking to marry under the SSA 1954.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Asha Mary George and Mithun John Varghese v. State of Kerala and Others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN** **WEDNESDAY, THE 10[TH] DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 19TH SRAVANA,** ## **1944** ## **WP(C) NO. 24182 OF 2022** ## **PETITIONER/S:** 1 ASHA MARY GEORGE AGED 36 YEARS D/O. GEORGE VADAKUMKARAPUTHANPURACKAL ABRAHAM, VADAKUMKARA PUTHENVEEDU, NALLANIKUNNU, ELAVINTHITTA P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN689 625, NOW RESIDING AT 64 HORSHAM ROAD, CRAWLEY, UNITED KINGDOM. 2 MITHUN JOHN VARGHESE, AGED 40 YEARS S/O. JOHN P. VARGHESE, PALAVILA HOUSE, H. NO. 223, AKG NAGAR, PEROORKADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-695 005. BY ADVS. SEBASTIAN CHAMPAPPILLY ANNIE GEORGE ## **RESPONDENT/S:** 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 2 THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 3 THE MARRIAGE OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695010. **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION** **ON 10.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C) No.24182 of 2022 -2- ## **JUDGMENT** Dated this the 10[th] day of August, 2022 The first petitioner, though of Indian origin, is now a citizen of the United Kingdom. Her first marriage was dissolved by decree dated 11.08.2021, which has attained finality as per Ext.P1 order of the Family Court of Bury St.Edmunds Court in the United Kingdom. The second petitioner is an Indian Citizen and his earlier marriage was dissolved by mutual consent _vide_ Ext.P2 judgment dated 02.02.2021 of the Family Court, Ernakulam. Subsequently, the petitioners got acquainted through the internet and decided to get married. Accordingly, they submitted Ext.P3 notice of intended marriage before the third respondent on 10.06.2022. On completion of the 30 days notice period stipulated in Section 5 of the Special Marriage ## W.P.(C) No.24182 of 2022 -3- Act, 1954, the second petitioner approached the third respondent to fix the date for solemnisation of marriage. Thereupon, the third respondent informed that the marriage cannot be solemnised unless the first petitioner produces a single status certificate from the Embassy. Even though the first petitioner approached the British High Commission in New Delhi for securing a single status certificate, she was issued with Ext.P5 communication stating that marriages in UK are governed by separate and different legislation and the consular staff are not qualified to assess or verify the marital status of a British National intending to marry in India. The first petitioner reached Thiruvananthapuram on 20.07.2022 for the purpose of solemnisation of marriage. She has to return to the UK on 23.08.2022. According to the petitioners, the insistence on production of a single status certificate from a country which ## W.P.(C) No.24182 of 2022 -4- does not issue such a certificate is an impossible condition. In such circumstances, the Marriage Officer should be directed to accept Ext.P7 notarised affidavit of the first petitioner affirming her single status. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners' right to marry cannot be curtailed by insisting on the production of a single status certificate, which is an impossibility, since the laws pertaining to marriage in the United Kingdom do not provide for issuance of such certificates. It is submitted that the first petitioner has affirmed her single status in Ext.P7 notarised affidavit. As per the provision of the Notaries Act 1952 Ext.P7 is a valid document on which the marriage officer can act. Attention is drawn to the decision in _**Shan S and another v. Marriage Officer [2022 (5) KHC 140]**_ , wherein, this Court had declared that, W.P.(C) No.24182 of 2022 **==> picture [16 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** marriage between an Indian and a foreign citizen can be solemnised if the foreign citizen produces an affidavit attested/notarised in the manner provided in Section 3 of the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Fees and Oaths) Act, 1948. 3. Learned Government Pleader submitted that, in the case of foreign citizens, the Government has issued Order No.J3-80/2021 dated 26/7/2021, making it mandatory for foreign citizens intending to marry in India, to produce non- objection and bachelorhood certificate from the Embassy. 4. In _**Shan S** (supra),_ a Canadian citizen wanted to marry an Indian citizen, but was being prevented from solemnising the marriage under the Special Marriage Act in view of the mandatory requirement of producing non- objection and bachelorhood certificate from the Embassy. After detailed consideration it was held that the ## W.P.(C) No.24182 of 2022 -6- marriage officer can accept and act upon the affidavit produced by the foreign citizen, attested/notarized in the manner provided in section 3 of the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Fees & Oaths) Act 1948. That was a case in which the spouse who is a foreign citizen, was unable to physically appear before the marriage officer. In the instant case, both intending spouses are in India and willing to physically appear before the marriage officer for solemnising their marriage. In Ext.P7 notarized affidavit, the first petitioner has affirmed that she is a divorcee and remains unmarried i.e.single and therefore, entitled to get remarried in accordance with the Special Marriage Act 1954 and that she fulfills all eligibility conditions. She has also stated that single status certificates are not issued by the authorities in the UK. 5. Circumstances being such, it is only appropriate that Ext.P7 affidavit, which is a W.P.(C) No.24182 of 2022 -7- duly authenticated document, be accepted and acted upon,rather than requiring the first petitioner to perform an impossible condition. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the third respondent to accept Ext.P7 affidavit in lieu of single status certificate and to solemnise and register the petitioners’ marriage in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act 1954. sd/- **V.G.ARUN JUDGE** Scl/10.08.22 W.P.(C) No.24182 of 2022 -8- ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24182/2022** |PETITIONER|EXHIBITS| |---|---| |Exhibit P1|(TRUE COPY OF FINAL DECREE DATED 6TH| ||MAY 2022 ISSUED BY THE FAMILY COURT AT| ||BURY ST. EDMUNDS, UNITED KINGDOM OF| ||GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND)| |Exhibit P2|(TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 2ND| ||FEBRUARY 2021 IN O.P. NO. 1855 OF 2019| ||ISSUED BY THE FAMILY COURT ERNAKULAM).| |Exhibit P3|(TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF INTENDED| ||MARRIAGE PREFERRED UNDER THE SPECIAL| ||MARRIAGE ACT 1954 DATED 10TH JUNE| ||2022) .| |Exhibit P4|(TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. J3/8/2021/LD| ||DATED 27TH JUNE 2021)| |Exhibit P5|(TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION NOTE| ||DATED 20TH MAY 2022 ISSUED BY THE| ||BRITISH HIGH COMMISSION IN NEW DELHI).| |Exhibit P6|(TRUE COPY OF THE AIR TRAVEL TICKET| ||(ELECTRONIC TICKET RECORD) ISSUED BY| ||SOUTHALL TRAVEL).| |Exhibit P7|(TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT DATED 21-07-| ||2022).|