'Notary Cannot Act As Marriage Officer': Madhya Pradesh High Court Accepts Notary's Apology With ₹2 Lakh Welfare Cost, Directs Display Board Against Notarizing Marriages

"Committing a mistake is not a sin, but repeating the same will be a sin. There should not be any hatred towards a sinner, but hatred should be for the sin." Madhya Pradesh High Court, in an order dated August 12, 2026, dropped suo motu proceedings against a Notary Public who illegally executed a marriage document after the notary tendered an unconditional apology, undertook to deposit ₹2,00,000 for advocate welfare, and agreed to install a warning board at his workplace.

A division bench of Justice G. S. Ahluwalia and Justice Anuradha Shukla firmly reiterated that a notary has no jurisdiction to act as a Marriage Officer or create a false impression of a lawful court marriage, observing that while an initial mistake may be condoned, repeating it would invite strict consequences.

The proceedings arose out of a habeas corpus petition where the corpus appeared before the High Court and revealed that an advocate had obtained signatures on certain papers at the Datia District Court under the guise of performing a court marriage. Upon examining the case diary, the court discovered an agreement titled "Vivah Baad Vivah Ke Panjiyan Bavat Likhtam" notarized by Notary Public Raghvendra Samadhiya. Taking suo motu cognizance under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the High Court issued a show-cause notice to the notary for exceeding statutory authority.

The primary question before the court was whether a Notary Public possesses the authority to notarize marriage agreements or act as a Marriage Officer. The court was also called upon to determine whether the unconditional apology and remorse expressed by the contemnor warranted dropping the suo motu proceedings.

Notary Has No Jurisdiction To Act As Marriage Officer Or Notarize Marriage Agreements

The High Court underscored that notaries appointed under the law have no legal sanction to solemnize or register marriages, nor can they issue documents that mislead young couples into believing they have undergone a valid court marriage. The bench referenced the binding Office Memorandum dated October 10, 2024, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Law and Justice, Department of Legal Affairs (Notary Cell), along with established High Court precedents, which expressly forbid notaries from executing marriage or divorce deeds. The bench noted that a notary is neither a marriage officer nor a marriage registration authority.

Apology Accepted On Conditions of Display Board And ₹2 Lakh Bar Welfare Contribution

Appearing before the court, the respondent notary admitted his mistake, tendered an unconditional apology, and submitted an affidavit undertaking never to notarize such documents again. To demonstrate bona fides, the notary voluntarily offered to deposit ₹2,00,000 towards the welfare of advocates and agreed to affix a prominent display board outside his office informing the public that notarization of marriage affidavits and deeds is prohibited by law.

Second Chance Granted But Warning Issued Against Future Defiance

Taking a reformative stance, the division bench observed that while the sincerity of remorse can only be tested through future conduct, another opportunity deserved to be extended to the contemnor in light of his voluntary undertakings. The court accepted the apology subject to the immediate fulfillment of all conditions before resuming practice.

"Committing a mistake is not a sin, but repeating the same will be a sin. There should not be any hatred towards a sinner, but hatred should be for the sin."

Strict Pre-Condition On Resumption Of Notary Functions

The bench directed that prior to resuming notary work, the respondent must install the mandatory display board and deposit the cost of ₹2,00,000 with the High Court Registry to be utilized by the High Court Bar Association, Gwalior for enhancing advocate services. The judges cautioned that any attempt to notarize documents before depositing the cost would be treated as utter defiance of the court's order, resulting in a permanent restraint from performing notary duties.

Bar Council Of India Member Commends Nationwide Awareness Drive

The court also recorded and appreciated the submission made by Senior Advocate Jitendra Sharma, a member of the Bar Council of India, that the Law Ministry's October 10, 2024 Office Memorandum would be widely circulated to all notaries across jurisdictions. The bench observed that this measure is essential to ensure that every notary is fully apprised of their statutory boundaries and to safeguard innocent citizens from being duped into believing notarized deeds constitute lawful marriages.

Disposing of the writ petition, the High Court dropped the suo motu proceedings upon accepting the notary's unconditional apology, conditioned upon the deposit of ₹2,00,000 cost and the installation of an informational display board. The ruling strongly reinforces statutory limits on notaries and seeks to curb the pervasive malpractice of executing unauthorized marriage deeds.

Date of Decision: 12 August 2026