Sign in
Family Law

Amanjot Singh Chadha v. Union of India 2025 INSC 1127 - Anand Marriage Act - Registration

CaseCiter

• 3 min read

Anand Marriage Act, 1909 - Section 6 -Section 6(3) of the Act preserves the validity of an Anand Karaj marriage even if it is not registered, which protects the sacrament but does not dilute the obligation to frame rules (Para 8)- Imposes a positive duty on every State Government to create a workable registration machinery for Anand Karaj marriages. That duty is not contingent on the size of the beneficiary group in any jurisdiction, nor can it be deferred on the footing that other marriage laws exist in parallel (Para 7)- Issued directions to the respective States and Union Territories that secure time-bound performance of the rule-making obligation under Section 6 of the Act and require interim facilitation under existing registration mechanisms so that the statutory promise of the provision is made effective - States and UTs that has not yet notified rules under Section 6 of the Act shall do so within four months from today. (Para 12)

Constitution - The fidelity of a constitutional promise is measured not only by the rights it proclaims, but by the institutions that make those rights usable. In a secular republic, the State must not turn a citizen’s faith into either a privilege or a handicap. (Para 1)

Marriage Registration -The availability of registration bears directly on equal treatment and on orderly civil administration. A marriage certificate enables proof of status for residence, maintenance, inheritance, insurance, succession and the enforcement of monogamy, and it particularly safeguards the interests of women and children who depend on documentary proof to claim legal protections. Uneven access to a statutory facility across States and Union Territories produces unequal outcomes for similarly situated citizens. In a secular framework that respects religious identity while ensuring civic equality, the law must provide a neutral and workable route by which marriages solemnised by Anand Karaj are recorded and certified on the same footing as other marriages. (Para 9)

Case Info

Case Name and Neutral Citation

  • Case Name: Amanjot Singh Chadha v. Union of India & Ors.
  • Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 1127

Coram (Judges)

  • Justice Vikram Nath
  • Justice Sandeep Mehta

Judgment Date

  • 4 September 2025

Caselaws and Citations


The provided judgment text does not explicitly mention or discuss other case laws or judicial precedents by name or citation. The order is focused on statutory interpretation and directions rather than referencing prior judgments.


Statutes/Laws Referred

  • Anand Marriage Act, 1909 (as amended in 2012)
    • Section 6 (Registration of marriages)
  • Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
  • Constitution of India
    • Article 32 (Right to Constitutional Remedies)
    • Article 371F(n) (Special provisions for Sikkim)
  • Goa, Daman and Diu (Administration) Act, 1962
Amanjot Singh Chadha v. Union of India 2025 INSC 1127 - Anand Marriage Act - Registration
Amanjot Singh Chadha v. Union of India 2025 INSC 1127 - Anand Marriage Act - Registration.pdf
259 KB
download-circle

Q&A


Q1: What was the main issue addressed in the Supreme Court’s decision in Amanjot Singh Chadha v. Union of India & Ors.?
A1: The main issue was the non-implementation of Section 6 of the Anand Marriage Act, 1909 (as amended in 2012), which requires States and Union Territories to frame and notify rules for the registration of marriages solemnised by the Sikh rite known as Anand Karaj. The petitioner sought directions to ensure that these rules are notified and that marriages are registered without discrimination.

Q2: What directions did the Supreme Court issue to States and Union Territories regarding the Anand Marriage Act, 1909?
A2: The Court directed all States and Union Territories that have not yet notified rules under Section 6 of the Act to do so within four months, publish the rules in the Official Gazette, and lay them before the State Legislature. Until such rules are notified, marriages solemnised by Anand Karaj must be registered under existing frameworks without discrimination.

Q3: How did the Supreme Court address the interim period before the notification of rules under Section 6?
A3: The Court ordered that, with immediate effect, all applications for registration of Anand Karaj marriages must be received and registered under the prevailing marriage registration framework. Where requested, the certificate should record that the marriage was solemnised by the Anand Karaj rite.

Q4: What specific directions were given for the State of Goa and the State of Sikkim?
A4: For Goa, the Court directed interim registration under existing frameworks and required the Union of India to extend the Anand Marriage Act to Goa within four months, followed by rule-making by the State. For Sikkim, interim registration was to be done under existing rules, with the Union of India considering extension of the Act to Sikkim, after which Sikkim must frame and notify rules.

Q5: What role was assigned to the Union of India in this judgment?
A5: The Union of India was designated as the coordinating authority, tasked with circulating model rules to States and Union Territories, compiling a consolidated status report within six months, and publishing it on the Ministry of Law and Justice website and submitting it to the Supreme Court Registry.