Child Marriage: Allahabad HC Orders Strict DOB Verification Before Marriage Registration, Issues Guidelines

The Allahabad High Court has held that marriage registration authorities cannot rely on Aadhaar cards alone or unverified school transfer certificates to establish age, directing the Uttar Pradesh government to introduce a structured verification process to prevent the registration of marriages involving persons below the statutory marriageable age.

Court said that the State Government shall ensure that the online registration system makes verification of the date of birth of both parties a mandatory step recorded together with the source verified, and does not allow an application to proceed where age is unverified or a discrepancy is flagged.

"No marriage shall be registered where either party has not completed the statutory age on the date of the application for registration," held the bench of Justice Tej Pratap Tiwari.

The bench observed that Aadhaar authentication establishes identity but does not, by itself, establish a person's date of birth.

Court also held that a mere school transfer certificate does not qualify as proof of age under Section 94(2) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

Court directed that the State shall prescribe and circulate a clear hierarchy of age records, consistent with the governing law.

"The date of birth certificate issued by the competent authority under the law governing registration of births and deaths, and the matriculation or equivalent record, shall be dealt with in the prescribed order; other educational or governmental records may be considered in the circumstances and order notified by the State," court said.

Moreover, court directed that the Inspector General of Registration, Uttar Pradesh, shall organise a State-level sensitisation programme for Marriage Registration Officers and concerned supervisory officers on age verification, source checking, conflicting records and identification of suspected child marriage. The Inspector General shall coordinate with the Director, Judicial Training & Research Institute, Lucknow, for suitable resource persons, court guided.

Court also ordered bi-monthly inspections of marriage registration offices across Uttar Pradesh, requiring district legal services authorities to examine samples of registered marriages and age-verification records and send reports through District Judges to the court.

The directions will remain in force pending amendment of the Uttar Pradesh Marriage Registration Rules, 2017, or the introduction of a comprehensive statutory procedure.

Court issued the directions while hearing a criminal appeal filed by one Deepak Pal.

Pursuant to court's September 2 order, an Assistant Inspector General of Registration had earlier appeared before the court and submitted a compliance affidavit. He informed the court that the marriage in the present case had been registered on the basis of the two documents but that the verification required under the applicable departmental instructions had not been carried out. He also tendered an unconditional apology and undertook to ensure proper verification of dates of birth in future.

Court observed that compulsory registration of marriages is not merely a mechanism for maintaining records. Referring to the Supreme Court's judgment in Smt. Seema v. Ashwani Kumar, court noted that compulsory registration serves purposes including preventing child marriages, ensuring compliance with the minimum marriageable age, checking bigamy and protecting women's rights to maintenance and inheritance.

It further relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Dolly Rani v. Manish Kumar Chanchal, observing that a registering authority cannot treat the issuance of a certificate as conclusive of the parties' marital status without satisfying itself that the statutory conditions have been fulfilled.

Section 5(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 prescribes a minimum age of 21 years for the bridegroom and 18 years for the bride. Court said the registering authority must establish that the parties have attained the statutory age before registering their marriage.

Examining the existing departmental verification mechanism, court identified gaps, including the absence of a prescribed hierarchy among age-proof documents and a procedure to deal with conflicting dates of birth. It also noted that the instructions did not expressly require examination of the underlying material on which an entry had originally been made or prescribe a separate process for doubtful records.

Therefore, court directed that applications involving conflicting dates of birth must be flagged for examination. Registration officers must identify the conflicting records, obtain and verify the underlying records from the issuing authorities, assess their legal and evidentiary basis, and record brief reasons for accepting a particular date of birth.

Court also directed the Principal Secretary of the Stamp and Registration Department to ensure that the standard operating procedure covers ordinary cases, conflicting or doubtful documents, unavailable records and escalation procedures.

District judges across Uttar Pradesh have been directed to convene meetings with district magistrates, registration authorities and Child Marriage Prohibition Officers to discuss implementation.

The matter has been listed for November 27, 2026, along with compliance reports from the authorities concerned.

Case Title: Deepak Pal v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Order Date: October 9, 2026

Bench: Justice Tej Pratap Tiwari