Recently, the Rajasthan High Court ruled that the registration of a marriage cannot be denied solely because one spouse is a foreign national.

Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, a single judge, was addressing a petition that challenged the decision of the Registrar of Hindu Marriages. The registrar had declined to register a couple's marriage citing the husband's foreign nationality and residency in Belgium as grounds for refusal.

"Marriages are pious knots in which two people are tied not only physically but also emotionally, mentally and psychologically.'' , the Court said.

The court specifically cited Section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which focuses on the registration of Hindu marriages, to support its stance.

The single judge duly observed that nowhere in the Act of 1995 is it explicitly stated that a foreign national who is a Hindu cannot register their marriage in India if it has been solemnized following the provisions of the Act.

The judge additionally affirmed that the fundamental right to equality, (under Article 14 of the Constitution of India) extends to foreigners as well. Therefore, authorities are not entitled to deny the registration of their marriages based on nationality.

The court emphasized that the fundamental human rights outlined in Articles 12 to 35 of the Constitution are assured to all citizens, reaffirming their universal applicability without discrimination.

The court delineated that while certain rights such as those safeguarded under Articles 15 (prohibition of discrimination), 16 (equal opportunity in public employment), 19 (rights including free speech, etc.), 29 (protection of minority interests), and 30 (rights of minorities to maintain educational institutions) are specifically applicable to Indian citizens, other fundamental rights extend not only to citizens of India but also to non-citizens, as affirmed by the Court's ruling.

The Court stated that a majority of countries adhere to principles of natural justice by granting fundamental rights to foreign nationals.

The Court took note that Articles 15, 16, and 19 specifically bestow rights upon "citizens," whereas the rights outlined in Articles 14 and 21 are granted to "any person."

The Court emphasized that the differentiation between 'a citizen' and 'a person' within our Constitution was purposefully established by its framers. This distinction was intended to allocate specific fundamental rights exclusively to citizens, while certain rights were intended to extend to any individual, indicating that while some rights are solely for citizens, others are meant for both citizens and non-citizens.

The Court emphasized that fundamental rights are crucial in promoting the principles of democracy and safeguarding the freedoms and liberties of individuals. Furthermore, the Court considered the application form for registering Hindu marriages. It highlighted that the format of the form does not specify that both the bride and groom must be citizens of India.

Finally, the court issued a broad mandate to both the Registrar of Hindu Marriages and the State's Chief Secretary. They were directed to revise their guidelines and the necessary format for marriage registration applications in accordance with the court's ruling.

Advocates Anirudh Tyagi and Kapil Mathur appeared on behalf of the Petitioners in the case.  Advocate Ishan Kumawat represented the State during the proceedings.

Case Title - Ashwani Sharad Pendese vs Registrar of Hindu Marriages