Read Time: 04 minutes
The court was hearing a case where, Vasmi Sudharshini P N, a resident of Kanyakumari and Rahul L.Madhu, an American national, fell in love and decided to get married. However, the marriage could not be solemnised on time and Rahul had to return to America. The couple, demanded that their marriage be solemnised virtually.
Justice Swaminathan of Madras High Court, while directing the Sub-registrar to solemnize a marriage through video conference, observed, “The Hindu householder has to perform hundreds of ceremonies but not one can be duly performed according to the shastras, if he has not a wife to complement it with her part in it.”
The above was held in a case where, Vasmi Sudharshini P N, a resident of Kanyakumari and Rahul L.Madhu, an American national, fell in love and decided to get married. Rahul came down to India and submitted a joint application with Vasmi, before the sub-registrar under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 on May 5, 2022. A notice was published by the Sub-registrar’s office on May 12, 2022. Upon completion of mandatory 30 days notice period, the parties appeared before the Sub-Registrar on June 12, 2022. However, the sub-registrar did not facilitate the marriage in his presence. Since, Rahul could not wait further owing to Visa requirements, he returned back.
The couple, thus, demanded that they should be allowed to solemnise their marriage virtually even though the bride is in India and the bridegroom is in USA.
The court, upon hearing these submissions, observed that choice is given to the parties to adopt any form of solemnisation of marriage under Special Marriage Act, 1954. The court observed, “One has read in history books that a Rajput bride can marry a Rajput warrior by garlanding his sword.”
It was further observed that in the given case, the parties do not wish to conduct proxy marriage and the bridegroom will be present but virtually. The court further noted that Section 12 of the Act does not exclude virtual presence of the parties.
Court on considering that the parties have the capacity to marriage and noting that there is no legal impediment for solemnising the marriage, directed that the marriage to be solemnised. It also directed that the bride can affix her signature in the marriage certificate book both for herself and on behalf of groom, as she hold his power of attorney.
Case title: Vamsi Sudarshini Vs Sub-registrar
Please Login or Register
