No public notice and no invitation of objections, but identity, age and consent will still be verified: the Allahabad High Court has dispensed with Special Marriage Act notice publication for an adult interfaith couple who feared harm from their families, directing the Marriage Officer to proceed and the police to protect them.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Lucknow: Waiving the publication of notice and the invitation of objections under Sections 6 and 7 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, has directed the Commissioner of Police, Lucknow, to provide protection and assistance to an adult interfaith couple who said they feared threats to their lives from their families [‘X’ and Another v. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home, Lucknow and 3 Others].
The writ petition was disposed of on October 6, 2026 by a Division Bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Amitabh Kumar Rai, with directions to the Marriage Officer of District Lucknow and to the police.
What the petitioners must do, and what officials must do
Within ten days, the petitioners must give notice of their intended marriage to the Marriage Officer of District Lucknow. The Marriage Officer may verify identity, age and valid consent, and must proceed towards solemnisation and issue the marriage certificate. The Commissioner of Police, Lucknow, was directed to provide protection and necessary assistance to the petitioners, including after the marriage, subject to a threat assessment under the law. The petitioners remain free to approach the police if they suffer any harm.
Why the notice steps fell away
The Bench relied on Article 21 of the Constitution and the Supreme Court’s decision in Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M. to recognise an adult’s right to choose a life partner irrespective of religion. It also followed an earlier ruling of the Court in Habeas Corpus No. 16907 of 2020, which treated the publication and objection steps under Sections 6 and 7 as directory. On that footing, it ordered that those provisions stand dispensed with:
Sections 6 and 7 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 “shall stand dispensed off in the present case.”
What the petitioners told the Court
The petitioners, two adults who follow different religions, said that they have been in a live-in relationship for about two years and wished to marry under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. Their families opposed the relationship, they said, and they feared for their lives. They asked the Court to direct the authorities to process their marriage application on the basis of their Aadhaar address and to dispense with the public notice requirement of the Act.
The Court noted that an FIR (Case Crime No. 306 of 2025) was registered on June 26, 2025 at P.G.I. Police Station, Lucknow, under Section 140(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on the complaint of the mother of the first petitioner. The investigating officer’s report recorded that the petitioners are adults living together. The allegations in the FIR are untested, and the present order records no view on them.
Why the order matters
The 30-day public notice under the Special Marriage Act has long been a point of friction for couples who fear family or community reprisal. By treating the publication and objection steps as directory and dispensing with them on the facts, the Court has allowed the statutory marriage to proceed while keeping the safeguards of identity, age and consent verification in place.
The order turns on its facts, including the police report that the petitioners are adults living together, and it does not decide the merits of the FIR registered on the complaint of a family member.
Case Title: ‘X’ and Another v. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home, Lucknow and 3 Others [Writ-C No. 9850 of 2026]
Bench: Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Amitabh Kumar Rai, Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench)
Date of Order: October 6, 2026
Appearances: Shailendra Misra for the petitioners; C.S.C. for the State