Apex Court Directs Compulsory Registration Of Marriages
In a ruling, having far reaching consequences, the Supreme Court has directed that all the marriages, irrespective of religion, will be compulsorily registered. The Court gave a time of three months to the centre and the state governments to frame and notify the rules in this regard.
The Court gave clear directions to incorporate the ‘consequences of non-registration’ in such rules. The Court also directed all such laws to be placed before the Court for scrutiny to ensure that the objective is not diluted at any stage.
Section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act enables the state government to make rules with regard to the compulsory registration of marriages. At present, only four states viz. Maharashtra, Gujrat, Karnataka and Himachal Pradesh have rules providing for compulsory registration of marriages.
The Court accepted the contention of the National Commission for Women (NCW) that non-registration of marriages affected women the most. Enumerating the benefits of the registration, NCW submitted that it would help prevent child marriages, check bigamy/polygamy, help women exercise their matrimonial rights, enable widows to claim inheritance and deter men from deserting their wives.
Solicitor General G E Vahnavati, who assisted the Court as ‘amicus curiae’ received appreciation from the Court for providing valuable data regarding the laws relating to Hindu, Muslim, Christian and Parsi marriages.
No Reply to SC Notice, says Speaker
The Loksabha Speaker Sh. Somnath Chatterji has categorically stated that he would neither accept a notice from Supreme Court nor would appear before the Court to explain the expulsion of some MPs, found guilty in the cash-for-query scandal.
The Speaker said this after an all-party meeting urged him to ignore the notices. The speaker expressed his highest regard for the Court, but opined that the Apex Court should have examined if it had any authority to look into a matter belonging to the exclusive domain of Lok Sabha. The Speaker also referred to the observations of the Apex Court in the JMM case that no court could take away the right of the House to decide on the conduct of the members.
105:- Powers, privileges, etc. of the Houses of Parliament and of the members and committ |
