TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
Sports
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | United StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Supreme Court to list plea on enforcing Anand Marriage Act for registration of Sikh marriages

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement
Advertisement

New Delhi, February 27

Advertisement

The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to list for hearing a PIL seeking directions to states and UTs to frame rules for the registration of Sikh marriages under the Anand Marriage Act, 1909.

Rules not framed

  • Act allows Sikh couples option to register marriages under it
  • State governments were supposed to frame rules, but it was not done

“Yes, we will list it,” said a three-judge Bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud after the petitioner’s counsel mentioned it with a request to list it for hearing. “This Act is concerning a century-old law,” the petitioner’s counsel told the Bench, alluding to the Anand Marriage Act, 1909. The top court had in November last year issued notice to the Centre, states and UTs on a petition filed by advocate Amanjot Singh Chadha. The 1909 Act was enacted to give legal sanction to Anand Karaj – the marriage ceremony of Sikhs — and to remove any doubts regarding its validity.

Advertisement

The Act was amended in 2012 to allow Sikh couples an option to register their marriages under it. As per the amendment, state governments were supposed to frame rules to facilitate the registration of Sikh marriages, contended the petitioner. He alleged the states were violating the fundamental rights of citizens by failing to frame and notify the rules mandated under the Act.

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement