Jharkhand High Court Declares Section 22-A of Registration Act as Unconstitutional

In a significant judgment, the Jharkhand High Court has struck down Section 22-A of the Registration Act, 1908—as introduced by the Bihar Amendment Act, 1991 and later adopted by Jharkhand—declaring it unconstitutional.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao and Justice Rajesh Shankar delivered the verdict in Chotanagpur Diocesan Trust Association v. State of Jharkhand [W.P. (C) No. 5088 of 2018], holding that the provision violated Articles 14 and 246 of the Constitution.

What is Section 22-A?

Section 22-A empowered the State Government to notify certain documents or classes of documents as being against "public policy," thereby prohibiting their registration by Sub-Registrars. The provision read:

• 22-A. Registration of documents which is against the public policy.—(1) The State Government may, by notification in the official gazette, declare that the registration of any document or class of documents is against the public policy.
• (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Act, the Registering Officer shall refuse to register any document to which the notification issued under sub-section (1) is applicable.

Why the Court Struck It Down

The Court relied on the Supreme Court’s precedent in State of Rajasthan v. Basant Nahata (2005) 12 SCC 77, where a similar provision was held ultra vires. The apex court had observed that “public policy” is an inherently vague and uncertain concept, unsuitable for executive determination without clear legislative standards.

It emphasized that:

• Only the judiciary has the limited power to interpret public policy.
• Allowing the executive to decide what constitutes public policy would violate constitutional boundaries.
• Even policy decisions are subject to judicial review if they breach fundamental rights or constitutional provisions.

The Jharkhand High Court followed this reasoning and noted that the impugned Section 22-A, as applicable in Jharkhand, was substantially similar to the Rajasthan version already invalidated by the Supreme Court.

Consequences of the Judgment

• Section 22-A, as adopted by the Jharkhand government, stands struck down.
• All actions taken under the notification dated 26-08-2015, including orders by Sub-Registrars or Registration Department officials, have been set aside.

Advocates

• For Petitioner: R.N. Sahay (Sr. Advocate), Indrajit Sinha, Puja Agarwal, Rohitashya Roy, and others.
• For Respondent-State: Mrinal Kanti Roy, Manoj Kumar, Mithilesh Singh, Jayant Franklin Toppo, and others.

Key Takeaway

This decision reaffirms the constitutional limits on executive power and underscores the judiciary’s critical role in interpreting undefined and sensitive legal concepts like public policy.