The Madras High Court on Friday came across an unusual case of a 26-year-old computer graduate seeking to quash the registration of her marriage on the ground that she was duped into signing the marriage register by making her believe that she was only signing as a witness for a marriage between some other couple.
When the case came up for admission before Justice K. Ravichandrabaabu, the judge wondered how an educated woman could go to the Sub-Registrar’s office, produce her identity proof, sign the register, pose for mandatory photographs taken by the registration department officials and then claim to have been cheated by her friend.
However, after the petitioner’s counsel contended that the High Court had in a similar case last year quashed fraudulent registration of a supposed marriage between a woman engineer and a Human Resource Department executive, the judge ordered notice to the individual with whom the petitioner had been reportedly married and the Sub-Registrar concerned.
In her affidavit, the petitioner, hailing from Chennai, said she had completed her Bachelor of Computer Applications (BCA) degree in 2013 and taken up a job at an IT firm on OMR. In 2014, she developed acquaintance with her colleague T. Balamurugan as he helped in her work, and they became close friends. In 2015, Mr. Balamurugan left the job and joined another private firm at Parry’s. Their friendship continued.
In September 2017, he reportedly requested the petitioner to sign as a witness to the registration of a marriage between his friend Kanchinathan and the latter’s partner at the Sub-Registrar’s office in Poonamallee.
The petitioner went to the Sub-Registrar’s office on September 21 and gave copies of her photographs and proof of residential address to Mr. Balamurugan. After a few minutes, she was taken into the office, asked to sign a register, besides affixing her thumb impression and then pose for a photograph.
She also claimed to have been told by Mr. Balamurugan that the couple had already visited the Sub-Registrar’s office secretly and left the place after signing the register.
“The petitioner submits that the first respondent/Sub-Registrar did not ask any question and the petitioner left along with the second respondent [Balamurugan]. After a few days, the second respondent informed the petitioner over phone that she was his wife and they were married,” the petitioner claimed.
It was only after obtaining a copy of the marriage registration certificate from the Sub-Registrar’s office, she found that it contained an averment as if their marriage had actually been solemnised at Sri Selva Vinayagar, Sri Elangaliyamman, Sri Ellaiyamman Alayangal at Prayambathu in Thirumazhisai on September 10 “which is a blatant lie.”
Her affidavit went on to state: “The petitioner submits that she is not even aware of existence of any such temple and moreover on September 10 she was at her home as it was a Sunday and had not even met the second respondent or came out of the house.”
