Marriage registration authorities across Uttar Pradesh must strictly verify the age of both brides and grooms against documentary evidence prior to formalising any union, the Allahabad High Court has ruled.
Justice Tej Pratap Tiwari held that registration officers are barred from approving any marriage if either party was legally a minor on the date of solemnisation. Under the directives, applications involving underage individuals cannot be cleared as a matter of routine and must be formally referred to local child marriage prohibition officers and competent district authorities for necessary legal intervention.
The ruling, issued on September 2, arose during the hearing of an appeal filed by a man facing prosecution under the Indian Penal Code, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Ghaziabad Minor’s Case Prompts Judicial Intervention
The bench intervened after discovering that administrative officials in Ghaziabad had formally registered a marriage involving an underage girl.
During the proceedings, counsel for the accused argued that the marriage was voluntary and that the bride was an adult, presenting an official marriage certificate as evidence. The prosecution contested this claim, maintaining that the trial court had confirmed the girl was a minor and asserting that the certificate had been obtained through the concealment of her actual age.
When the High Court summoned the relevant registration officer to account for the clearance, the official stated he had recently taken charge from his predecessor and possessed no knowledge of how the minor’s marriage came to be registered.
Court Rejects Clerical Oversight Defence
The court described the official’s explanation as a matter of serious concern, observing that internal departmental rules explicitly mandate the verification of birth dates for both parties before issuing a certificate. Justice Tiwari observed that the inability of the office to account for the registration pointed to a prima facie breakdown of supervision, verification, and statutory accountability.
The bench stressed that approving the marriage of an underage individual without birth date scrutiny cannot be treated as a clerical lapse. Instead, the court termed it a failure of public responsibility that warrants supervisory scrutiny and the fixation of institutional liability.
The court further noted an absence of any evidence indicating that age verification had been conducted in the Ghaziabad case.
Broader Implications for State Policy
Justice Tiwari observed that underage registrations are not isolated or occasional occurrences, noting that multiple such instances have surfaced before the judiciary.
The court emphasised that marriage registration records serve a broader purpose than merely issuing certificates to private individuals. Accurate public records, the bench noted, are vital for the government to track demographic patterns, evaluate social trends, and design welfare interventions. The court stated that an administrative mechanism failing to identify child marriages undermines the state’s capacity to assess the scale of the problem and enforce measures aimed at eradicating it.
Authorities across the state have been directed to strictly enforce the verification guidelines. The High Court has scheduled the matter for further hearing on October 5.
