- SECTION 65 read with Section 114 and 77
- Bench: Justice G.S. Singhvi, Justice Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya
Facts:
The parties to the case were married to each other as per Hindu customs and rites and lived happily. In 2005, the appellant became pregnant and gave birth to a male child. The problems between the couples started and only became worse and the families got involved, where the respondent alleges that the appellant were campaigning to ruin the name of her husband. In 2006 there was a petition for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the respondent. Later it was discovered that the wife was actually married already in 1998 and did not make aware of this to her husband’s family before marriage, amounting fraud. Hence seeking for the marriage to be annulled as it is voidable at his behest. The wife appealed to teh judgement of the lower court against her in this current petition.
Issues:
There were four main issues that the court had framed, limiting to the Evidence Act, the question was whether the certificate of marriage is a public document and therefore, a presumption can be drawn under Sec.114 (e) of the Evidence Act?
Contentions of the Appellant:
It was contented by the appellant, wife that neither the Registrar of marriage nor the witnesses to the Marriage Certificate of 1998 were examined by the Court, nor are the photos of the bridegroom affixed to the certificate. Based in Section 8(4) of the HMA there must be a prescribed fee that is to be paid for the registration of marriage and as per Section 114 the court presumes that the said act has been performed regularly. However as per Section 68 of the Act the proof of execution is necessary with attestation to be admitted. Since the same is missing, the Certificate was to be held invalid.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The respondent referred to a previous judgement and contended that the Hindu Marriage Register and the certified extract therefore is a public document within the meaning of Sec.74 of the Evidence Act. The official act of a public authority is to enter the said statements in the Marriage Register kept by him, therefore, it is a public document within the meaning of Sec.74 of the Evidence Act and should be considered as secondary admissible evidence under Section 65 of the Act.
Judgment:
The certified copy of the Hindu Marriage Register was adjudged as being a public document within the meaning of Sec.74 of the Evidence Act. The certified copies were also admissible as secondary evidence under Sec.65(e) and 65(f) of the evidence Act. The Rules pertaining to the Registration of Marriage prescribes the official Act of the Registrar in scrutinizing the application and registering the same. Therefore, the official act is presumed to be done in the manner in which it is to be exercised as per the Rules. In that event, presumption under Sec.114 (e)of the Act can be drawn to the fact that the statements therein were entered as per the prescribed rules in the marriage certificate.
