The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court on 22 April 2019, has issued order declaring a marriage solemnized between a male and a transwoman, both professing Hindu religion, is valid in terms of Section 5 of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 and the Registrar of Marriages is bound to register the same.
Earlier, the petitioners, a transgender and a male submitted a memorandum for registration of marriage under Rule 5 (1) (a) of the Tamil Nadu Registration of Marriages
Rules in Form I to the Registrar and the officer has refused to register the same and hence have they preferred to a legal remedy.
The registering officers have relied on Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Registration of Marriages Act,2009 that empowers them to refuse registration, in case of they being satisfied that the marriage between the parties was not performed in accordance with the personal laws of the parties, any custom or usage or tradition.
Further, Section 7 (1) (c) of the same Act, empowers them to refuse registering the marriage, in case of the documents so tendered do not prove the Marraige status of the parties.
The contention was also that the Oxford Advance Learner's Dictionary of Current English refers 'Bride' to a Woman on her wedding day. Thus the concerned person, being a transgender and not a woman, has failed to fulfill the statutory requirement set out in Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
However, The Bench observed that the expression "bride" in Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 shall include, a woman, a transwoman, an intersex person (person with a genatalia, resembling neither a man nor a woman) or a transgender person, whosoever identifies oneself as a woman. It is understandable that the personal sexual identity of the person concerned alone is sufficient at identifying the gender and the anatomy or sexual orientation is of no concern.
One may ask, what if the same situation happened with the groom rather than the bride. The response would be that, the same ruling would apply.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Jz2Gt1b2uXcVzNzZPIL2WD_X3cwpPzN9/view?usp=drivesdk
Marriage Act, 1955 and the Registrar of Marriages is bound to register the same.
Earlier, the petitioners, a transgender and a male submitted a memorandum for registration of marriage under Rule 5 (1) (a) of the Tamil Nadu Registration of Marriages
Rules in Form I to the Registrar and the officer has refused to register the same and hence have they preferred to a legal remedy.
The registering officers have relied on Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Registration of Marriages Act,2009 that empowers them to refuse registration, in case of they being satisfied that the marriage between the parties was not performed in accordance with the personal laws of the parties, any custom or usage or tradition.
Further, Section 7 (1) (c) of the same Act, empowers them to refuse registering the marriage, in case of the documents so tendered do not prove the Marraige status of the parties.
The contention was also that the Oxford Advance Learner's Dictionary of Current English refers 'Bride' to a Woman on her wedding day. Thus the concerned person, being a transgender and not a woman, has failed to fulfill the statutory requirement set out in Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
However, The Bench observed that the expression "bride" in Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 shall include, a woman, a transwoman, an intersex person (person with a genatalia, resembling neither a man nor a woman) or a transgender person, whosoever identifies oneself as a woman. It is understandable that the personal sexual identity of the person concerned alone is sufficient at identifying the gender and the anatomy or sexual orientation is of no concern.
One may ask, what if the same situation happened with the groom rather than the bride. The response would be that, the same ruling would apply.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Jz2Gt1b2uXcVzNzZPIL2WD_X3cwpPzN9/view?usp=drivesdk
No comments:
Post a Comment