The Allahabad High Court held that a Hindu marriage without registration is still valid and divorce petitions cannot be rejected only for lack of a marriage certificate. The Court set aside the Family Court’s order and allowed the divorce petition to proceed.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
UTTAR PRADESH: In a very important judgment, the Allahabad High Court has clarified that filing a marriage registration certificate is not mandatory for getting divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
This ruling came in the case Sunil Dubey vs Minakshi, where Justice Manish Kumar Nigam set aside the order of the Azamgarh Family Court, which had rejected the couple’s mutual divorce petition only because they had not produced a marriage registration certificate.
The couple was married in 2010 and had filed a mutual divorce petition under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in October 2024. Since they did not have the marriage registration certificate, they both filed an application saying there is no compulsory requirement of registration under the Act.
But the Family Court rejected it, citing Rule 3(a) of the Hindu Marriage and Divorce Rules, 1956.
The High Court examined the law carefully & quoted Sec 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955
**”Section 8 in The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
8. Registration of Hindu marriages.-
(1) For the purpose of facilitating the proof of Hindu marriages, the State Government may make rules providing that the parties to any such marriage may have the particulars relating to their marriage entered in such manner and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed in a Hindu Marriage Register kept for the purpose.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the State Government may, if it is of opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do, provide that the entering of the particulars referred to in sub-section (1) shall be compulsory in the State or in any part thereof, whether in all cases or in such cases as may be specified, and where any such direction has been issued, any person contravening any rule made in this behalf shall be punishable with fine which may extend to twenty-five rupees.
(3) All rules made under this section shall be laid before the State Legislature, as soon as may be, after they are made.
(4) The Hindu Marriage Register shall at all reasonable times be open for inspection, and shall be admissible as evidence of the statements therein contained and certified extracts therefrom shall, on application, be given by the Registrar on payment to him of the prescribed fee.
(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, the validity of any Hindu marriage shall in no way be affected by the omission to make the entry.”**
The Court noted that this section itself says that not registering a marriage does not make it invalid.
The Court also discussed U.P. Marriage Registration Rules, 2017. Rule 6(2) clearly says that a marriage done before or after the 2017 Rules will not become illegal only because it is not registered.
The judgment cited many earlier decisions.
For example, in Malati Dasi Vs. Japa Hari Pal, the Calcutta High Court said:
“…only a certificate of marriage issued by the Marriage Registrar under Section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act cannot sufficiently establish the marriage to warrant a conviction under Section 494 I.P.C.”
Similarly, the Madras High Court in R. Anita Marginic Vs. R. Annadurai said:
“The registration is not the sole proof of marriage in order to become a valid marriage… Section 7 of the said Act provides that the validity of a marriage will depend on observance of ‘customary rites and ceremonies.'”
Another ruling from Madras High Court in P. Kamakshi alias Kala Jacob Vs. P. Devaki stated:
“Merely because a marriage has not been registered under Hindu Marriage Act, it does not follow that in fact marriage has not taken place… An omission to register marriage will not invalidate marriage if in fact a marriage ceremony was performed.”
Likewise, the Rajasthan High Court in Varindra Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan held:
“Therefore, the certificate itself is not a conclusive proof of the marriage… it is only a certificate of ‘facilitating the proof of Hindu Marriages.'”
The Supreme Court in Seema Vs. Ashwani Kumar (2006) observed:
“Though, the registration itself cannot be a proof of valid marriage per se, and would not be the determinative factor regarding validity of a marriage, yet it has a great evidentiary value…”
Again, in Dolly Rani Vs. Manish Kumar Chanchal (2024), the Supreme Court said:
“The registration of a marriage under Section 8 of the Act is only to confirm that the parties have undergone a valid marriage ceremony in accordance with Section 7 of the Act. In other words, a certificate of marriage is a proof of validity of Hindu marriage only when such a marriage has taken place and not in a case where there is no marriage ceremony performed at all.”
The Allahabad High Court also recalled its own recent judgment in Maharaj Singh Vs. State of U.P. (2025) where it had said:
“…if the marriage between two Hindus was not performed in accordance with the procedure mentioned in Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, even then, the marriage registration certificate issued under the Rules of 2017 will not be a substantive proof of marriage.”
The Court stressed that procedural law is meant to help justice, not block it. It quoted the Supreme Court in Sangram Singh Vs. Election Tribunal Kotah (1955):
“It is ‘procedure’, something designed to facilitate justice and further its ends: not a penal enactment for punishment and penalties; not a thing designed to trip people up.”
Also quoting Chinnammal Vs. Arumugham (1990), the Court said:
“No man should suffer a wrong by technical procedure of irregularities. Rules or procedures are the handmaids of justice and not the mistress of the justice.”
And in Salem Advocate Bar Association Vs. Union of India (2005), the Supreme Court held:
“The rules of procedure are made to advance the cause of justice and not defeat it. The rules or procedure are hand-maid of justice and not its mistress.”
Finally, the High Court clarified Rule 3(a) of the Hindu Marriage and Divorce Rules, 1956:
“Every petition under the Act shall be accompanied by a certified extract from the Hindu Marriage Register maintained under section 8 of the Act, where the marriage has been registered under this Act.”
This means, if the marriage is not registered, there is no such requirement.
Final Order of the Court
The High Court held that the Family Court’s insistence on a marriage certificate was wrong. It set aside the order of 31.07.2025 and allowed the petition.
The Family Court was directed to decide the pending mutual divorce case quickly, as per law, without giving unnecessary adjournments.
Explanatory Table of All Laws, Rules & Court Cases Mentioned
Case Title: Sunil Dubey vs. Minakshi
Case Number: Matters Under Article 227 No. 9347 of 2025
Order Date (Judgment Delivered On): 26.08.2025
Reserved On: 21.08.2025
Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Court No. 9
Judge: Hon’ble Justice Manish Kumar Nigam
Parties Involved:
- Petitioner: Sunil Dubey
- Respondent: Minakshi
Counsel for Petitioner: Chandan Kumar Chaturvedi
Counsel for Respondent: Not mentioned (as the Court noted no objection from the other side and disposed at admission stage).
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Hindu Marriage
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Divorce
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
