The Delhi High Court has held that mere personal hardship or individual inconvenience, howsoever genuine, cannot furnish a ground to permit waiver or curtailment of the statutory period of thirty days prescribed under the Special Marriage Act. The statutory scheme contemplates solemnization of marriage only upon expiry of 30 days from the date of submission and publication of notice under the Act.

The petition before the High Court was filed by a couple who intended to solemnize their marriage under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, 1954.

The Single Bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav held,“Mere personal hardship or individual inconvenience, howsoever genuine, cannot furnish a ground to dilute or bypass mandatory statutory compliance. The legal maxim dura lex sed lex, “the law is hard, but it is the law”, stands attracted in such circumstances.”

“The Court, thus, finds no justifiable ground to permit waiver or curtailment of the statutory period of thirty days prescribed under the Act of 1954”, it added.

Advocate Mohit Aggarwal represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

It was the case of the first petitioner that he had secured employment abroad and was required to join before June 10, 2026. In view of the impending joining date and the consequent relocation abroad, it was submitted that the petitioners would suffer grave hardship if compelled to await expiry of the statutory waiting period prescribed under the Act, particularly when there existed no legal impediment to solemnization of the marriage. A notice of intended marriage was submitted before the Marriage Officer in terms of Section 5. In terms of the statutory scheme contemplated under Sections 6 and 7, the statutory waiting period of thirty days was yet to expire. The date fixed for solemnization of marriage has been scheduled as June 19, 2026.

Reasoning

The Bench was of the view that the statutory scheme contemplates solemnization of marriage only upon expiry of 30 days from the date of submission and publication of notice under the Act. “Reference in this regard can be made to Section 16 of the Act of 1954, which expressly postulates that a marriage under the said enactment may be solemnized only after the lapse of thirty days from the publication of notice contemplated under Section 6 thereof”, it added.

The Bench highlighted the fact that while enacting a statutory framework, the legislature is presumed to be conscious of the practical implications and possible hardships that may arise in individual cases. The Bench also stated that the Courts must remain circumspect in rewriting or diluting statutory requirements on considerations of individual exigencies.

Finding no justifiable ground to permit waiver or curtailment of the statutory period of thirty days prescribed under the Act, the Bench held that the relief sought by the petitioners, if granted, would amount to directing the statutory authorities to act contrary to the express legislative mandate contemplated under the said enactment.

Thus, finding the petition to be devoid of merit, the Bench dismissed the same.

Cause Title: Syed Fayazuddin v. Government of NCT of Delhi (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:4935)

Appearance

Respondent: Advocates Mohit Aggarwal, Prerak Khurana

Click here to read/download Order


Delhi High CourtJustice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.