Allahabad HC flags child marriage registrations in UP, orders age checks
The Allahabad High Court has directed marriage registration authorities across Uttar Pradesh to mandatorily verify the age of both parties before registering a marriage, calling the registration of marriages involving minors a “serious concern”.
The direction came after the court learnt that authorities in Ghaziabad had registered the marriage of a minor girl.
Justice Tej Pratap Tiwari issued the directions while hearing an appeal filed by a man facing a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The court expressed concern over instances of marriages involving minors being registered despite requirements to verify the ages of the parties.
“A matter of considerable concern emerges regarding the registration of marriages involving persons below the legally prescribed age,” the court said in its September 2 order, noting that such instances did not appear to be isolated or occasional and had been noticed in a number of cases.
The court said that if a Marriage Registration Officer registers the marriage of a child without verifying the date of birth, the omission cannot be treated as a mere clerical lapse. It amounts to a failure to discharge the responsibility attached to the office and calls for supervisory scrutiny and fixation of responsibility, it said.
The court directed that marriage registration authorities in Uttar Pradesh shall not register a marriage if either party was a minor on the date the marriage was solemnised.
It further ordered authorities to mandatorily satisfy themselves, using reliable documentary evidence and prescribed verification procedures, about the age of both parties as on the date of solemnisation.
If the documents show that either party was below the statutory age, the registration application should not be processed as a routine matter. Instead, the matter must be brought to the notice of the Child Marriage Prohibition Officer and the competent district authority for appropriate action, the court directed.
The prosecution in the case had alleged offences under the Indian Penal Code, the POCSO Act and the SC/ST Act.
Counsel for the accused argued that the girl was an adult and had voluntarily married him, after which the marriage was registered and a certificate issued.
The State, however, submitted that the trial court had found the girl to be a minor and that the marriage certificate could not establish that she was a major because it was allegedly obtained by concealing her age.
The court had summoned the officer concerned to explain how the marriage of a minor girl was registered. The officer said he had taken charge from the previous in-charge officer and had no knowledge of how the marriage had been registered.
The court termed the response “a matter of serious concern”, noting that departmental instructions expressly require verification of the date of birth of both the bride and groom before registration.
“The inability of the officer or the office to explain the circumstances in which the marriage of a minor was registered, prima facie reflects a serious failure of supervision, verification and accountability in the discharge of the statutory functions, entrusted to the Marriage Registration Officer,” the court said.
The court also noted that there was no evidence to establish that any verification of the parties’ ages had been carried out before the marriage was registered.
It emphasised that the purpose of maintaining marriage registration records is not merely to preserve individual certificates, but also to enable the State to assess demographic and social trends and formulate appropriate policies and welfare measures.
“A system which fails to correctly identify child marriages cannot provide the State with a dependable basis for assessing the magnitude of the problem or for devising effective measures for its prevention and eradication,” the court said.
The court directed the authorities to comply with its instructions and listed the matter for further hearing on October 5.