Background
The Delhi High Court has held that Indian citizenship is not mandatory for two foreign nationals seeking registration of their marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 (SMA), provided they fulfil the other statutory and procedural requirements.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia made the observation while dealing with a petition filed by a Swedish citizen holding an Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) Card. Her husband was also a Swedish citizen.
The couple had married on March 14, 2026, at an Arya Samaj Mandir in Delhi according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. The petitioner sought registration of the marriage and challenged citizenship and permanent-residence requirements contained in the Delhi Government’s guidelines governing marriage registration under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA).
The petitioner claimed that her marriage was governed by the HMA. The authorities, however, questioned whether the HMA applied to the marriage because the material produced did not establish that the petitioner’s husband had converted to Hinduism.
The Court noted that the Arya Samaj marriage certificate only recorded that the marriage had been solemnised according to Hindu rites, ceremonies and customs. It did not establish the religion of either party or independently prove the alleged conversion of the husband.
Legal Issue
The principal issue was whether the petitioner could challenge the citizenship and residence conditions applicable to registration under the HMA and whether the couple had an alternative statutory mechanism for registering their marriage under the SMA.
The Court examined the amended Delhi Government guidelines governing marriage registration under the SMA. The guidelines generally provide that at least one party must be an Indian citizen, but expressly create an exception where both parties are foreign nationals.
The Court therefore considered whether the petitioner and her Swedish husband could rely on this exception despite neither being an Indian citizen.
The Court also examined whether the petitioner’s OCI Card could be treated as equivalent to Indian citizenship for the purpose of the guidelines.
In addition, the petitioner sought relaxation of the 30-day residence requirement under Section 15 of the SMA, citing the inconvenience involved in complying with the requirement.
Court Ruling
The High Court held that the amended guidelines expressly permit an application for registration under the SMA where both parties are foreign nationals.
The Court observed that although the guidelines ordinarily require at least one party to be an Indian citizen, they specifically provide that this condition does not apply when both parties are foreign nationals. Therefore, the couple could apply for registration under Chapter III of the Special Marriage Act, subject to fulfilment of the remaining statutory and procedural requirements.
The Court, however, declined to accept the petitioner’s claim that her marriage was established as a Hindu marriage merely because it had been solemnised according to Hindu rites.
It noted that the marriage certificate issued by the Arya Samaj Mandir did not establish that the husband was a Hindu within the meaning of Section 2 of the HMA. There was also no independent material proving his alleged conversion to Hinduism.
The Court therefore held that the petitioner could not rely on the HMA route to challenge the citizenship and permanent-residence conditions applicable to HMA registration.
At the same time, the Court pointed out that the couple had an alternative route under the SMA. Since both were Swedish citizens, they fell within the exception under the amended guidelines for marriages between two foreign nationals.
The Bench also clarified that an OCI Card does not confer Indian citizenship. An OCI cardholder remains a foreign national for purposes of the citizenship requirement under the amended guidelines.
The Court further refused to relax the 30-day residence requirement under Section 15 of the SMA merely because compliance could cause inconvenience to the petitioner. It held that the residence requirement has a jurisdictional purpose because it determines the territorial jurisdiction of the concerned Marriage Officer.
Therefore, while the couple could apply under the SMA without either spouse being an Indian citizen, they still had to comply with the applicable statutory requirements.
The Court also addressed difficulties faced by foreign nationals and OCI cardholders on the online marriage-registration portal. It directed the authorities to consider suitable modifications allowing identity verification through documents such as passports and OCI Cards where Aadhaar-based authentication was not available.
The Court further observed that, where permissible under the applicable procedure, the petitioner could appear before the concerned authority through video conferencing.
The petition was accordingly disposed of, with liberty to the petitioner to apply for registration under Chapter III of the SMA. Any such application was directed to be considered on its own merits and in accordance with the applicable statutory requirements.
Implications
The judgment clarifies that Indian citizenship is not an absolute requirement for two foreign nationals seeking registration of their marriage under the Special Marriage Act in Delhi. The amended Delhi guidelines specifically provide an exception where both parties are foreign nationals.
The judgment also distinguishes between OCI status and Indian citizenship. Holding an OCI Card does not make a person an Indian citizen for the purpose of the marriage-registration guidelines.
At the same time, the ruling does not mean that foreign nationals can register their marriage without complying with the other requirements of the SMA. The Court specifically declined to waive the 30-day residence requirement under Section 15 and emphasised that the applicable statutory and procedural conditions continue to apply.
The judgment also highlights the distinction between registration under the Hindu Marriage Act and registration under the Special Marriage Act. Solemnisation of a marriage according to Hindu rites does not, by itself, establish that the HMA applies where the statutory requirements concerning the parties’ religion are not established.
The judgment adds clarity on the availability of the Special Marriage Act as a registration route for marriages between two foreign nationals and the procedural requirements that continue to apply.
Case: Sejal Gandhi (Through Duly Constituted SPA, Shri Pankaj Gandhi) v. Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi & Ors.
