Reena Chadha & Anr v. State (NCT of Delhi)
(2021) 283 DLT 690
In the High Court of Delhi
W.P. (C) 6653/2021
Before Justice Rekha Palli
Decided on September 09, 2021

Relevancy of the Case: Appearing through video conferencing in an application for marriage registration

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Constitution of India, 1950 (Article 226)
• The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 273)
• The Delhi (Compulsory Registration of Marriage) Order, 2014 (Clause 4(d), 4(e))

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The petitioners, an Indian couple, solemnised their marriage as per Hindu rites and ceremonies in Delhi on December 06, 2021.
• They applied for marriage registration as per provisions of the Delhi (Compulsory Registration of Marriage) Order, 2014, without the insistence of their physical appearance because they were residing in the US.
• The Registrar denied the registration due to the non-physical appearance of the petitioners. Hence, they have filed the present petition.

Prominent Argument by the Advocates

The petitioner’s counsel:

• She argued that there are genuine reasons for failure in their attempt to physically apply for the registration earlier. They could not travel to Delhi in 2021 because of restrictions imposed due to COVID-19.
• Their attempt to make an online application failed as they did not possess an Aadhaar card or voter ID. These documents are mandatory to apply through the portal.
• Moreover, the Registrar should appreciate significant technological advancements and rely on video conferencing. Clause 4(d) and 4(e) of the 2014 Order does not mandate the parties’ physical presence before the Registrar.

The respondent’s counsel:

• She submitted that the parties’ physical presence is necessary for mandatory activities. These activities include capturing and uploading live photographs on the portal, obtaining the physical signatures of both parties and assessing the soundness of minds and consent. The interpretation of Clause 4 mandates physical presence before the authority.

Opinion of the Bench

• Significant technological developments have taken place since the Order came into force.
• The court would include the video conferencing option under the purview of physical appearance, as in various previously held cases.
• The Registrar’s role is to register an already solemnised marriage. The Registrar does not have the authority to solemnise a marriage.

Final Decision

• The court accepted the writ petition and directed the respondents to register the petitioners’ marriage.