Logo
Court Book - India Code App - Play Store

Kerala HC Allows Name Update in Marriage Record for Interfaith Wife Seeking UAE Visa, Citing Parental Consent

Vivek G.

Aayisha Muhsin v. State of Kerala & Others, Kerala High Court permits adding changed name in marriage certificate for interfaith wife seeking UAE visa, invoking Article 226.

Kerala HC Allows Name Update in Marriage Record for Interfaith Wife Seeking UAE Visa, Citing Parental Consent
Join Telegram

In a sensitive ruling balancing personal choice, family bonds, and statutory limits, the High Court of Kerala permitted a woman to add her changed name to her marriage record, even though the rules normally bar such major alterations. The court stepped in after noting the emotional plea of the petitioner’s parents and the practical difficulty she faced in joining her husband abroad.

Background of the Case

The case was filed by Aayisha Muhsin, earlier known as Sreeja S, who married Ahmad Muhsin M in January 2017 under the Special Marriage Act, a law that allows interfaith marriages without religious conversion.

Read also:- Supreme Court Rules Dumpers, Excavators Not ‘Motor Vehicles’; Gujarat Road Tax Demand Quashed

Several years after marriage, Sreeja voluntarily adopted Islam and officially changed her name to “Aayisha Muhsin” through a Kerala Gazette notification. All her identity documents-passport, Aadhaar, PAN, voter ID, and ration card-were updated accordingly.

The problem arose when she applied for a family visa to the UAE, where her husband is employed. The UAE authorities required a marriage certificate matching her current name. However, her Kerala marriage certificate still carried her former name, “Sreeja”.

When she requested correction, the local registrar declined, citing government instructions that do not allow “major changes” in marriage registers.

Read also:- Preventive Detention Misused: Supreme Court Frees Telangana Woman Held in Ganja Cases

Under the Kerala Registration of Marriage (Common) Rules, 2008, only limited corrections-such as clerical or factual errors-are normally allowed. A complete name change, especially one made years after marriage, is treated as a “material change” and is generally prohibited.

Government clarifications also advised that instead of altering certificates, individuals could produce supporting documents showing their name change.

Court’s Observations

Justice P. V. Kunhikrishnan examined whether strict application of the rules should override personal circumstances.

“The beauty of secular India,” the judge observed, “is that a person can marry across religions without conversion, and can also adopt another faith by choice.”

The court noted that there is no religious compulsion requiring a woman to change her name after adopting Islam. It even reflected on the meaning of “Sreeja,” pointing out that nothing in faith or law prevented her from retaining it.

Read also:- Supreme Court curbs private fraud complaints under Companies Act, partially quashes Telangana

However, the judge expressed concern that the husband had not appeared before the court, despite opportunities to do so. This raised doubts, though the court stopped short of drawing conclusions.

What weighed heavily was the affidavit filed by the petitioner’s parents. They confirmed that their daughter’s name change was voluntary and expressed their desire to see her live happily with her husband.

“With folded hands,” the judge remarked, the court acknowledged the parents’ emotional appeal.

While recognising that the rules barred major alterations, the court invoked its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution to do “complete justice”.

The judge referred to earlier rulings where courts allowed additional name entries without deleting the original one, ensuring both identity continuity and legal safety.

“The old name cannot be erased,” the court stressed, as marriage records must remain traceable and not open to misuse.

Read also:- Madras High Court Stays Single Judge Order in CBFC Film Certification Row, Flags Lack of Fair

Final Decision

Allowing the writ petition, the court directed authorities to make an additional entry in the marriage register reflecting the petitioner’s new name, “Aayisha Muhsin”, without deleting her original name.

The local registrar was ordered to issue a revised marriage certificate with the added name within one month.

The judgment ends with a simple hope-that the woman may now join her husband in the UAE and “lead a happy married life,” as wished by her parents.

Case Title: Aayisha Muhsin v. State of Kerala & Others

Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 38145 of 2025

Case Type: Writ Petition (Civil)

Decision Date: 05 January 2026