The amendment of Section 4 in the parent Act, 1974 came on 1.12.82 by which second proviso was added and as such the Govt. retain the power to curtail/extend the area and the question of retrospectivity does not arise as the curtailment of the area took place after 1982. In the meanwhile, Rule 10 of Rules, 1975 was amended on 30.12.97. The impugned orders were passed on 10.6.98 and 17.6.98 whereby the area in which a Nikah Registrar has been licensed was further curtailed. The orders having been passed after amendment of Rules 10 of Rules, 1975, those are not retrospective in nature. As a matter of fact those are
prospective in nature—The petitioner’s licence as a Nikah Registrar has not at all been revoked affected but under the second proviso of Section 4 of the Act his area has been curtailed which the Government is authorised under the law to do.

Mr. Raisuddin Vs. Bangladesh & Ors. 7BLT (AD)-332


Second Proviso of the Section 4 has empowered the Government to extend, curtail or otherwise alter the limits of any area for which a Nikah registrar has been licensed, whenever the Government deems it fit to do so.

Moulavi Md. Khurshid Alam Vs. Ministry of Law, Bangladesh 6BLT (AD)-196


The petitioner’s licence as Nikah Registrar has not been cancelled but the areas of his jurisdiction has been curtailed which the government has the power to do.

A.H.M. Lutfor Rahman Vs. Bangladesh & Ors 8 BLT (AD)-133

Section —4

General Observation

We have given our anxious consideration and find that if the words “in the prescribed manner” are inserted there in Section 4 of the Muslim Marriages and Divorces (Registration) Act, 1974 omitting the phrase “whenever thing fit so to do” like Section 4 of the Pourashava ordinance, 1977 and Section 3 of the Union Parishad Ordinance, 1983 and if the “manner” is specifically provided in the Rules the second proviso to Section 4 may hold good. It is not necessary to struck down this proviso. Interpretation of statute is necessarily in favour of maintaining the statute, if possible.

Moulana Ruhul Mannan Helali Vs. Government of Bangladesh & Ors. 11 BLT (HCD)-336

Section-4 read with Muslim Marriages and Divorces (Registration) Rules, 1975


Whether Nikah Registrars are public servant.

The Nikah Registrar shall perform the duties of their office under the general superintendence and control of the Inspector General of Registration. Besides, a Nikah Registrar cannot resign his office or leave the place in which he has exercised the function of a Nikah Registrar without permission of the Government —Held A Nikah Registrar is a public servant.

Kazi Obaidul Haque Vs. The State 8 BLT (HCD)-340

Muslim Marriage and Divorces (Registration) Rule, 1975


It appears that the petitioner was appointed as Nikah Registrar for the areas of 3 unions and that he has been acting as an agent of the Government in the matter of registering the marriage and realisation of the taxes for the purpose. The very appointment has not created no legal right in the said post inasmuch as Second Proviso to section 4 of the Muslim Marriage and Divorces (Registration) Act, 1974 and the Rule 10 of the Muslim Marriage and Divorces (Registration) Rule, 1975 has been considered and found to be valid by this Court in 51 DLR (AD) 152.

Md. Nasir Uddin Vs. Govt. of Bangladesh & Ors 16 BLT (AD) 151.