Special Marriage Act, 1954

Context

Recently, the Supreme Court dismissed a writ petition challenging provisions of the Special Marriage Act (SMA).

The petition challenged the Constitutional validity of certain provisions of the SMA under which couples seek refuge for inter-faith and inter-caste marriages.
The writ petition has called these provisions violative of the right to privacy guaranteed under Article 21of the Constitution as they require couples to give a notice of 30 days before the date of marriage inviting objections from the public.
The petition claims that the provisions contravene-
- Article 14 on prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste and sex.
- Article 15 on right to equality as these requirements are absent in personal laws.

The Special Marriage Act, 1954 (SMA) was enacted to facilitate the marriage of couples professing different faiths, and preferring a civil wedding.
However, some practical problems arise in registering such marriages.
The law’s features on prior public notice being given and objections for the safety and privacy of those intending to marry across religions.
To overcome this, many settle for marriage under the personal law of one of them, with the other opting for religious conversion.

Section 5 of the SMA: It requires couples getting married under it to give notice to the Marriage Officer 30 days before the date of marriage.
Section 6: It requires notice to be entered into the Marriage Notice Book maintained by the Marriage Officer, which can be inspected by “any person desirous of inspecting the same.
Section 7: It provides the process for making an objection such as if either party has a living spouse, is incapable of giving consent due to “unsoundness of mind” or is suffering from a mental disorder resulting in the person being unfit for marriage or procreation.
Section 8: It specifies the inquiry procedure to be followed after an objection has been submitted.