Kerala High Court Invokes Extraordinary Jurisdiction To Allow Change In Woman’s Name In Marriage Register After Religious Conversion
The Kerala High Court was considering a petition filed by the petitioner whose request to make a correction in the Marriage certificate was rejected.
Justice P.V Kunhikrishnan, Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction to allow a married woman to change her name in the marriage register after she adopted her husband’s Islamic faith. The High Court took note of the fact that the parents of the woman wished to fulfil their daughter's desire.
The High Court was considering a petition filed by the petitioner whose request to make a correction in the Marriage certificate was rejected.
The Single Bench of Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan stated, “Keeping in mind the above principle and also to fulfill the desire of the parents of “Sreeja”, who is now known as “Aayisha Muhsin”, I think this Court can invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to make necessary changes in the marriage certificate. Let the old “Sreeja” who is now “Aayisha Muhsin” lead a happy married life with her husband in the UAE, as intended by her loving parents.”
Advocates S. Vinod Bhat represented the Petitioner, while Advocate R. Rajpradeep represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
One Sreeja S. fell in love with Ahmad Muhsin M. The marriage was solemnised in 2017 as per the Special Marriage Act, 1954. Following the marriage, Sreeja intended to adopt her husband's Islamic faith. However, Sreeja changed her name to “Aayisha Muhsin” in 2023 (approximately 6 years after her marriage). The name was changed in 2023 after notifying the same in the Kerala Gazette. Pursuant to the notification, the name stood changed in all of the documents and identity cards. Sreeja’s husband’s passport had also been revised to reflect the change of name of the petitioner. Her husband is working in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and she wanted to join her husband in the UAE.
The Federal Authority for Identity, Citizenship, Customs, and Port Security (ICP) is the authority that issues family visas in the UAE. It was submitted that the application for a family visa must include the passports of the wife and children, as well as the attested marriage certificate, among other documents. It was the case of Sreeja, now known as ‘Aayisha Muhsin’, that, for the purpose of applying for a family visa, her marriage to Ahmad Muhsin was registered under the Kerala Registration of Marriage (Common) Rules, 2008. She wanted a correction of the certificate of marriage. The petitioner submitted an application. However, the respondent informed the petitioner of the inability to effect changes to the certificate of marriage, citing the letter of the Principal Registrar General - Marriages. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the Writ Petition before the High Court.
Reasoning
Referring to Rule 13 of the Rules 2008, the Bench explained that major changes to an entry already made in a marriage register are not permitted. If any entry in the Register of Marriages (Common) is erroneous in form or substance or has been fraudulently or improperly made, subject to conditions in sub-rule (2), suitable corrections, including cancellation of registration, noting the evidence for such corrections in the margin of the Register of Marriages (Common), without any alteration of the original entry alone is possible.
The Bench stated, “The prayer of the petitioner is to change the name of the petitioner, who is now known as “Aayisha Muhsin” instead of “Sreeja”, entered in the marriage register. This is a major change in the name, which is admittedly not due to anything entered erroneously in form or substance, or to anything fraudulently or improperly made. Therefore, such major corrections in the marriage register cannot be carried out in the light of the specific bar in the rule.”
Affirming that any citizen of this country may adopt or follow another religion because our constitution permits it, the Bench highlighted the fact that there are limitations on changing a person's name on a marriage certificate under Rule 2008. “Major changes or amendments are not permitted in a certificate of marriage issued under the “Rules 2008”, it added.
However, the Bench considered the fact that the loving parents of Sreeja also wished to fulfil their daughter's desire. “This court is keeping its head down with a folded hand before the loving parents of the petitioner. They only want a happy life for their loving daughter”, it stated.
The Bench further mentioned, “Keeping in mind the above principle and also to fulfill the desire of the parents of “Sreeja”, who is now known as “Aayisha Muhsin”, I think this Court can invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to make necessary changes in the marriage certificate. Let the old “Sreeja” who is now “Aayisha Muhsin” lead a happy married life with her husband in the UAE, as intended by her loving parents.”
Thus, allowing the writ petition, the Bench directed the Respondent to incorporate an additional entry in the relevant page of the marriage register by adding the name of the petitioner as “Aayisha Muhsin”. “...thereafter the 2nd respondent will issue a marriage certificate to the petitioner with the new added name of the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment”, it ordered.
Cause Title: Aayisha Muhsin v. Principal Secretary (Neutral Citation: 2026:KER:639)
Appearance
Petitioner: Advocates S. Vinod Bhat, Anagha Lakshmy Raman, V. Namitha, Gitanjali Sadan Pillai
Respondent: Advocates R. Rajpradeep, Prasudha.S, Sreedevi, S. P. Jeril Babu Government Pleader Riyal Devassy