Anand marriage act,1909

In Explanation I under Article 25, the Constitution found intelligible differentia, intelligible enough to differentiate Sikhs from Hindus.

In Explanation II under Article 25, the Constitution did not find intelligible differentia, intelligible enough to differentiate Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist from Hindus.

Probably the legislature legislating Hindu Marriage Act,1955, went by the Explanation II in Article 25 of the Constitution and did not find intelligible differentia, intellible enough to differentiate between Hindus on one hand and Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs on the other hand.

Thank you Sir,

Since The Supreme Court vide its judgment dated 14.02.2006 in Seema Vs. Ashwani Kumar (AIR 2006 S.C 1158) has directed the State Governments and the Central Government that marriages of all persons who are citizens of India belonging to various religious denomination should be made compulsorily registerable in their respective States where such marriages are solemnized.

Most of the State Governments and Union territory Administrations are taking necessary steps to make all marriages compulsorily registered in their respective States/ territories where such marriage is solemnized irrespective of religious denominations. Giving this information in written reply to a question in the Rajya Sabha, Shri Salman Khurshid, Minister of Law & Justice, said that having regard to the position of law as contained in Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 which is applicable to Hindus, Sikhs, Budhist, Jainas and other persons who are not Muslims, Christians, Parsis and Jews and that Section 8 thereof covers the registration of Sikh Marriages within its ambit and that secluding Sikhs from other categories of person may invite similar demands from other religious denominations which would go against directive principle contained in article 44 of the Constitution. Hence, no separate legislation for registration of Sikh marriages is considered necessary, Shri Khurshid said.

Now  where is the question of " invite similar demands from other religious denominations" because Anand Marriage Act is already existing and can be amended..

I 'AM EXTREMELY SORRY TO ALL  READERS, I  DIDN'T WRITE THE CAPITAL LETTERS TO "MARRIAGE" AND "ACT". I WAS NOT ABLE TO CORRECT IT AFTER POSTING IT. SO,KINDLY EXCUSE IT.
 

how are sikh marriage laws different from hindus? go thru bare act does it say anything about natutre of ceremony to make a sikh marriage invalid?

only nature of ceremony is different.

it will only help in creating a separate identity for sikhs and no other useful purpose will be served.

as far as jains are concerned they are very well intermingled with hindus and creation of a separate marriage act will only create complications.

ps : i m not against a separate identity for sikhs or marriage law, but taking on legal issues sikh marriage laws are similar to hindu laws.

Anand Marriage Act can be amended, there appears to be no problem from the legal or Constitutional perspective. Decision of government seems more like a political decision than a legal decision.

If my understanding of Sikh marriage is correct, marriage is also a part of religious affair in Sikh religion. As per Article 26(b) of the Constitution, every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right to manage its own affairs in matters of religion. Hence the question of legislating to compel people of all religions to register marriages would be a violation of this article, especially for those who can manage their marriages under their religion. Hence on this count, I find the decision of Supreme Court vide its judgment dated 14.02.2006 in Seema Vs. Ashwani Kumar (AIR 2006 S.C 1158) to be violative of Article 26(b)

It has already been held by courts that since Life and Liberty is guaranteed under Article 21 of Constitution, two adults can do a live in and State has no role to interfere. Just like live in, marriage also comes under the guarantee of Life and Liberty of Article 21. Therefore it also needs to be investigated, as to what extent and when can State interfere in matters related to marriage of two or more adults. In my opinion the State has no right or role to interfere or delay the matters, if two individuals belonging to any religion decide to do a voluntary mutual divorce. Any law to regulate a fundamental right should pass the test of Strict Scrutiny else the very purpose of the Constitutional guarantee may get defeated. I have tried to explain Strict Scrutiny in one of my posts in the thread at https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/RKBA-guaranteed-under-Articles-19-and-21-of-Constitution-36011.asp