Allahabad High Court
SANE ALI AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed; the petitioner must file an appeal under Section 17 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954.
Summary
Petitioner Sane Ali and another filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a certiorari to quash the orders of the Registrar of Marriages under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, which refused to solemnise and register their marriage. The Registrar declined on the ground that the parties had not appeared before him, and the standing counsel argued that the Registrar had no duty to solemnise the marriage but the petitioner could appeal under Section 17 of the Special Marriage Act. The petitioner contended that the period for filing such an appeal was limited to 30 days. The Court examined whether a writ remedy was appropriate or whether the statutory appeal route must be pursued. It directed the petitioner to prefer an appeal under Section 17 within two weeks and, if filed, to have the appeal heard and decided on merits within a further month. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without granting the relief sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the refusal of the Registrar of Marriages to solemnise and register a marriage can be challenged by a writ of certiorari under Article 226.
- Whether the petitioner must first avail the statutory remedy of filing an appeal under Section 17 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954.
Legislation cited
- Special Marriage Act, 1954 — s. 17
Subjects
- Special Marriage Act
- Article 226
- certiorari
- appeal
- marriage registration
- writ petition
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 35793 of 2026
Sane Ali And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ali Bin Saif, Dinesh Kumar
Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 1
HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.
HON'BLE SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226
of the Constitution, petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari
to quash the orders passed by Registrar Marriages under the
Special Marriage Act, 1954 refusing to solemnization and
registration of marriage.
3. While the learned Standing Counsel submits that if the
parties fail to appear before the Special Registrar Marriages
under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, there is no duty cast
upon the Registrar Marriages to solemnize such marriage and
register the same. However, he submits that the petitioner has
an efficacious remedy to file a statutory appeal under Section
17 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage submits that
the period prescribed for entertaining the appeal is only 30
days.
5. In the given facts and circumstances, we dispose of this writ
petition with direction to the petitioner to prefer an appeal
under Section 17 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 against the
order dated 11.03.2026 passed by the District Magistrate,
WRIC No. 35793 of 2026
2
District Bareilly and in the event he prefers any such appeal
within two weeks from today, his appeal shall be heard and
decided on merits within a further period of one month.
6. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition
stands disposed off.
(Siddharth Nandan,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.)
September 17, 2026
S.Prakash
Digitally signed by :-
SHASHI PRAKASH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…