Proof Of Residence An Essential Mantra For Marriage
By Asif Iqbal
16 April, 2013
Countercurrents.org
Etawah, in Uttar Pradesh witnessed a case of honour killing in the complex of the District Administration Office. The news was covered exclusively by the news channel viz. India TV on 24th Feb 2013. According to the girl named Kirti, she went with Adnan for filing the papers of solemnization of their marriage under Special Marriage Act. Adnan was shot and killed by two motorcyclists who escaped. I would like to highlight the statement of Kirti, “the Marriage Officer rejected our form for intended marriage for 3 consecutive times” and according to her, he said, “you are doing a wrong thing, I will never let it happen”. After listening to the news, I felt not much have changed in the state like Uttar Pradesh since decades. The above statement gave me reason to recollect the statement of SDM, NOIDA during my efforts for solemnization of my marriage in the year 1999. He shared candidly, “You are doing a nice thing but, I can’t do it from my jurisdiction as it might lead to law and order problem”.
The incident of honour killing in Etawah has highlighted again the role and importance of the Special Marriage Act for couples particularly with different religious background. It has also questioned the role of electronic media which is usually limited to breaking sensational news. India TV showed this particular news in the morning and later covered the complexity of inter-religious marriage for at least half a day by interviewing a few couples and individuals. I contacted the channel on behalf of DHANAK through phone and emails on 4-5 times to getting the contact details of Kirti. The objective was to make a representation against the concerned Marriage Officer of Etawah who played a malicious role in the case of Kirti and Adnan. I was informed that the news team will take a decision about sharing the contact details. Surprisingly, the team didn’t even care to respond to my several requests through emails.
Now let me share the importance and challenges in implementation of the Special Marriage Act – 1954. The Act is the only possible option for a-religious form of marriage but, at the same time it also acts as a major threat to the life and liberty of the marrying couples due to its poor and shoddy implementation. Section 5 of Special Marriage Act – 1954 states that “when a marriage is intended to be solemnized under this Act, the parties to the marriage shall give notice thereof in writing in the form specified in the Second Schedule to the Marriage Officer of the district in which at least one of the parties of the marriage has resided for a period of not less than thirty days immediately preceding the date on which such notice is given.” The above mentioned Section talks about the address proof of only one of the marrying couple. But, almost all the Marriage Officers push the marrying couple to submit their respective address proofs. The marriage solemnization is denied where only one of the couple has the address proof. In most of the small towns the Marriage Officers take extra interest in confirming the address proof by ordering a police inquiry. Let me share few examples to substantiate my point.
Shri. Umesh Narian Pandey, Marriage Officer of Jhansi was approached by Sunaina and Tariq (names changed). They filed their form for Intended Marriage with the help of an advocate and with the consent of their parents from Jhansi in the month of May 2012. The SDM sent a police enquiry, locally known as LIU (Local Intelligence Unit) to confirm their residence proofs. The police inquiry at their respective houses found that Sunaina and Tariq are working and staying in Delhi. The police officials who did the enquiry discouraged both the parents for the marriage of their daughter/son with a person from different faith. They convinced Tariq’s parents to sign a declaration stating they have no contacts with their son after he went to Delhi for his job. The enquiring police official convinced them that the declaration will protect them from a legal action in case of a possible complaint by Sunaina’s parents of her abduction after the marriage.
Based on the LIU report, the SDM Jhansi called Sunaina and Tariq and asked them to submit affidavits stating their present address of stay and job in Delhi. They were also asked to write the addresses of the concerned police station and the ADM/SDM in Delhi, which shall be contacted by him. SDM Jhansi sent letters to Police Station, Mukharjee Nagar and SDM North-West in Delhi with a list of questions about the couple. Surprisingly, he also enquired about the age of the couple doubting the age certificate submitted by the couple to his office. The SHO, Mukharjee Nagar sent his report back to SDM Jhasi, confirming the residence and age proof of the couple. But, this 4 month long exercise proved useless when the SDM Jhansi turned down the couples request with a verbal apology of his oblivion about the section 5 of SMA. According to the Section – 5, they can’t marry from the place where they are not residing at the time of marriage.
After failing in Jhansi, the couple restarted the process at the office of SDM West, Delhi. They tried using their police verification report as an address proof since the couple didn’t have any of the required proof of residence in Delhi. Initially their request was declined by concerned Marriage Officer. But, later he agreed to accept the police verification report after he was shown state govt. rules related to acceptance of police report as address proof. In the meantime the jurisdiction of the Marriage Officer shifted to District North therefore, they approached the concerned ADM with a request for usage of the police report as address proof. Luckily he accepted it as an address and finally, the couple got married after 7-8 months of perseverance.
Similarly, Kripal and Shabiha (names changed) faced the problem at a place called Erode in Tamil Nadu. Shabiha is based in Coimbatore and has the residence proof of Kolkota. They filed their form for intended marriage in March 2013 to the Marriage Officer, Erode in the presence of their respective parents as witnesses. Kripal used his address proof of Erode for filing his papers but, the Marriage Officer had asked for confirmation from the concerned officer in Kolkota to authenticate a copy of passport submitted by Shabiha as her address proof. The requirement again is against Section -5 of SMA. Later, after telling him that it is not possible to get such document he agreed to solemnize the couple’s marriage by the end of next month. In their case the parents were in support of their marriage therefore, the Marriage Officer obliged them or else they were left with no other option but to go for a religious marriage.
It is important to share one more case of misuse of authority by ADM (Marriage Officer), West Delhi. Asim (name changed) is working in UK and Kiranjit (name changed) is working in Delhi. Asim was honest to write his present address of UK in the intent of marriage form and therefore, the concerned official asked for address proof of UK although, Asim had attached the address proof of his permanent address at Delhi. The Marriage Officer was questioned the requirement on the basis of Section – 5 of SMA. He was also shown a copy of the rules by Delhi Govt. in support of provision in Section – 5 of SMA. The requirement of address proof of Asim was not required as the principle applicant was Kiranjit who used her jurisdiction for the marriage solemnization. But, the ADM decided otherwise and said, “I have the power to ask for the address proof of both of you, leave aside the rules & guidelines”. Challenging of ADM’s decision would have delayed the marriage. Therefore, Asim submitted a copy of his bank statement of UK to prove his present residence.
One can also question that how is it possible to get a proof of residence within one month of stay at a place according to Section – 5 of the Act? And that too, it has to be a passport, ration card, voter ID, adhar card or any other official document like identity card issued by a government office. In such a case, the Marriage Officer can order the local police station to provide a report, also known as police verification report to establish the received information from the marrying couple is correct. This was mentioned above in the case of Sunaina and Tariq. But, this provision for police verification is never shared in written or verbally with such a couple. This attitude from the officials proves that they are not in favour of such secular form of marriages. Our attempt through couple of representation for making the information about police verification public is under consideration by the Special Secretary (Revenue) Delhi and City Magistrate, Sector – 19, NOIDA for past several months. At present, government of India is expediting the process of issuing the Adhaar Cards. I hope, it should consider doing away the provision of address proof of specific jurisdiction for marriage solemnization/registration. The Marriage Officer should accept the Adhaar Card of any location in India for the marriage of a couple from its jurisdiction.
The write-up will be incomplete if I don’t write about the horror in marrying couple about receiving the “notice of intended marriage” by their respective parents. The notice is sent by the Marriage Officer on the basis of received attested copies of the couples address proof. This dirty practice serves as a major deterrent to couple planning to solemnize their marriage according to Special Marriage Act. In the states like Delhi, Maharashtra, Kolkota and Kerala the practice has stopped largely due to the efforts of the ruling political parties or due to the court’s order. But, in all other states the practice is being followed religiously. This practice is highly intimidating for the marrying parties who face threat to their life and liberty by their decision of marrying to the partner of their choice.
With reference to the above shared examples, I would like to write that the government is countering its own efforts of marriage registration by overlooking the regressive and discriminatory practices by its officials. Several states are promoting and practicing compulsory registration of marriage. The efforts are only for documentation of religious marriage. But what about solemnization of a-religious marriage under Special Marriage Act - 1954? Government should recognize Special Marriage Act as one of the essential tools of retention of secularism in India. Till date, the Act is being used by a few urban elites who can afford to wait and plan their marriage. The simplification of its rules and amendment of Section – 7 of the Act which mandates 30 days of period of notice before solemnization/registration of the marriage are today’s need. The proposed changes will offer an option to all those, irrespective of their socio-economic background, who dares to place love before faith.
The writer is a Founder Member of a group viz. Dhanak. This group is working on the issues of couples in inter-faith/caste relationships for past 8 years. Kindly visit www.dhanak.org.in to learn more about Dhanak
Comments are moderated
