{"id":3996,"date":"2024-12-27T23:58:01","date_gmt":"2024-12-27T18:28:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lawjurist.com\/?p=3996"},"modified":"2024-12-28T00:03:13","modified_gmt":"2024-12-27T18:33:13","slug":"seema-v-ashwani-kumar-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lawjurist.com\/index.php\/2024\/12\/27\/seema-v-ashwani-kumar-2006\/","title":{"rendered":"Seema v. Ashwani Kumar (2006)"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n

Citation:<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

AIR 2006 SC 1158<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Author Anusha Srivastava from Prestige Institute Of Management\u00a0<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
Supreme Court of India<\/span><\/h6>\n
Names\u00a0of Parties:<\/b><\/h6>\n
Petitioner: Smt. Seema;<\/span><\/h6>\n
Respondent: Ashwani Kumar<\/span><\/h6>\n
Hon’ble Judges:<\/b><\/h6>\n
Justice Arijit Pasayat;<\/span><\/h6>\n
Justice S.H. Kapadia<\/span><\/h6>\n
Date of Judgment:<\/b><\/h6>\n
14 February, 2006<\/span><\/h6>\n
Subject:<\/b><\/h6>\n
Transfer Petition (Civil)\u00a0291 of 2005<\/span><\/h6>\n
INTRODUCTION<\/b><\/h6>\n

Is\u00a0 marriage a contract or a sacrament? When discussing marriage\u00a0 in law school, this is one of the first questions students ask. Unlike Hindu law, which considers marriage\u00a0 a highly sacred ceremony, Islamic law considers marriage\u00a0 a simple contract. All marriage-related laws are governed by the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which applies to all Hindus (including Jains, Sikhs, and Buddhists), but not\u00a0 Muslims, Parsis, Christians, or Jews. Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 lays down the essential conditions for a Hindu marriage, which are: At the time the marriage is solemnized, there should be no surviving spouse of either party. Neither spouse may be mentally incapacitated and incapable of giving consent.\u00a0 Neither spouse may suffer from any mental disorder that would prevent them from marrying or procreating.\u00a0 Neither spouse may be suffering from insanity or epileptic fits.\u00a0 At the time of\u00a0 the wedding, the bride must be 18 years of age and the groom\u00a0 21 years\u00a0 of age. Spouses are not allowed to have forbidden relations with each other unless custom prescribes. Spouses are not allowed to be “saptapadi” to each other until custom permits. As per the provisions of Section 7 of the Act, Hindu marriages must be solemnized according to the customary and pious rites and rituals of the bride and groom. One such custom is “saptapadi”. In simpler terms, it can be said that if a marriage is solemnized between the bride and groom according to the rituals and all\u00a0 the conditions mentioned in Section 5 are fulfilled, then the marriage will be considered as a valid marriage\u00a0 and\u00a0 certain rights and obligations will be conferred on the bride and groom as husband and wife. Until 2006 when this judgment was announced, no marriage registration was required. However, while the case was pending, the Supreme Court ordered all husbands and wives to file marriage certificates after learning of numerous atrocities suffered by women due to lack of marriage documents, as most marriages in India were not registered until the early 2000s.<\/span><\/p>\n

Facts:<\/b><\/h2>\n

In 2005, the plaintiff, Seema, filed a suit against the defendant, Ashwani Kumar, in a local court in Haryana due to frequent clashes and arguments between the couple. During the proceedings, the case was transferred to the Additional District Judge (ADJ) Court in Delhi. On 15 April 2005, an interim injunction was issued staying the proceedings. The case was then referred to the Supreme Court of India as a major issue of unregistered marriages had emerged.<\/span><\/p>\n

The matter was referred to the Supreme Court as many people could refuse to marry due to lack of official marriage certificates. However, this was particularly problematic in India as very few\u00a0 states had legislated mandatory marriage registration and this requirement was inconsistent across states, resulting in a lot of legal ambiguity and complexities in marriage disputes. Considering the far-reaching implications, the Supreme Court issued notices to various states and union territories expressing its view on the issue. The court approached the then Attorney General and senior advocate Ranjit Kumar, asking him to appoint them as amicus curiae to assist the court in the matter. Following the court’s notice, all\u00a0 states and union territories said they would be keen to put in place a mechanism to make marriage registration mandatory at the earliest. The agreement emphasised the need for marriage registration to prevent the abuse of informal marriages, which often exploit the weaker sections of society. One of the main issues that the Supreme Court had to consider in this case was whether compulsory marriage registration should be introduced and adopted\u00a0 as a legal requirement across India. In view of the increasing number of matrimonial disputes leading to\u00a0 denial of marriage due to lack of\u00a0 uniform provisions regarding marriage registration, the Supreme Court has been asked to critically examine the existing legal framework regarding marriage registration in\u00a0 various states. Further, the Court has been asked to bridge the gaps that exist in view of the contradictory laws prevailing in various states affecting the rights of individuals in married life. The case was referred to the Supreme Court in the hope of deciding on the process of compulsory marriage registration, which would help in simplifying matrimonial disputes and providing legal clarity and protection to all concerned.<\/span><\/p>\n

Isuess:<\/b><\/h2>\n
    \n
  • Whether the registration of marriage should be a mandatory provision or not?<\/span><\/li>\n
  • Whether this mandate is constitutional or not?<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    Arguments in Smt. Seema v. Ashwani Kumar AIR 2006 SC 1158<\/b><\/p>\n

    \u00a01. Arguments by the Appellant (Smt. Seema):<\/i><\/b><\/h4>\n
      \n
    • Need for Compulsory Registration:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      \u00a0\u00a0– The appellant argued that the lack of compulsory marriage registration led to numerous social issues, including denial of marriage, child marriage, bigamy, and difficulties in proving marital status.<\/span><\/p>\n

      \u00a0\u00a0– Compulsory registration would provide legal recognition to marriages, thereby protecting the rights of women and children.<\/span><\/p>\n

        \n
      • Uniform Law:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

        The appellant emphasized the need for a uniform law for marriage registration applicable to all citizens, irrespective of their religious background.<\/span><\/p>\n

        \u00a0\u00a0– A uniform law would eliminate discrepancies and ensure that all marriages are legally documented.<\/span><\/p>\n

          \n
        • Protection of Rights:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

          \u00a0\u00a0– The appellant argued that compulsory registration would help in protecting the rights of women, particularly in cases of abandonment, desertion, and domestic violence.<\/span><\/p>\n

          \u00a0\u00a0– It would also ensure the legal recognition of children born out of wedlock and secure their inheritance rights.<\/span><\/p>\n

          \u00a02. Arguments by the Respondent (Ashwani Kumar):<\/i><\/b><\/h4>\n
            \n
          • Existing Legal Framework:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

            \u00a0\u00a0– The respondent contended that existing laws, such as the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and the Registration Act, 1908, already provided for the voluntary registration of marriages.<\/span><\/p>\n

            \u00a0\u00a0– The respondent argued that making registration compulsory might not be necessary and could lead to administrative challenges.<\/span><\/p>\n

              \n
            • Religious Freedom:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

              \u00a0\u00a0– The respondent raised concerns about the impact of compulsory registration on religious freedom.<\/span><\/p>\n

              \u00a0\u00a0– Different religious communities have their own customs and practices regarding marriage, and a uniform law might infringe upon these traditions.<\/span><\/p>\n

                \n
              • Practical Challenges:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                \u00a0\u00a0– The respondent highlighted the practical challenges in implementing compulsory registration across a diverse country like India.<\/span><\/p>\n

                \u00a0\u00a0– Issues such as lack of infrastructure, awareness, and accessibility in rural areas could hinder the effective implementation of compulsory registration.<\/span><\/p>\n

                3. Arguments by Amicus Curiae (Mr. G.E. Vahanvati and Mr. Ranjeet Kumar):<\/i><\/b><\/h4>\n
                  \n
                • Support for Compulsory Registration:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                  \u00a0\u00a0– The amicus curiae supported the appellant’s arguments for compulsory marriage registration.<\/span><\/p>\n

                  – They emphasized that compulsory registration would help in addressing various social issues and provide legal recognition to marriages.<\/span><\/p>\n

                    \n
                  • Constitutional Validity:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                    \u00a0\u00a0– The amicus curiae argued that compulsory registration of marriages is in accordance with constitutional principles.<\/span><\/p>\n

                    \u00a0\u00a0– They pointed out that Entries 5 and 30 of List III (Concurrent List) of the Constitution authorize both the central and state governments to enact laws on marriage and the registration of vital statistics.<\/span><\/p>\n

                      \n
                    • International Perspective:**<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                      \u00a0\u00a0– The amicus curiae referred to international practices where compulsory registration of marriages is a norm.<\/span><\/p>\n

                      \u00a0\u00a0– They argued that India should adopt similar practices to ensure legal recognition and protection of marital rights.<\/span><\/p>\n

                      Laws Involved in Smt. Seema v. Ashwani Kumar AIR 2006 SC 1158<\/b><\/p>\n

                      The case of Smt. Seema v. Ashwani Kumar involved several legal provisions and statutes that were pertinent to the issue of marriage registration in India. Here are the key laws that were considered in this case:<\/span><\/p>\n

                      Hindu Marriage Act, 1955:<\/b><\/h5>\n

                      \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Section 8:<\/i><\/b><\/h3>\n

                      \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0– This section deals with the registration of Hindu marriages.<\/span><\/p>\n

                      \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0– It provides for the voluntary registration of Hindu marriages and allows state governments to make rules for compulsory registration.<\/span><\/p>\n

                      \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0– The section aims to ensure that marriages are legally documented and recognized.<\/span><\/h5>\n
                      The Registration Act, 1908:<\/b><\/h5>\n

                      \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Section 6:<\/i><\/b><\/h3>\n

                      \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0– This section empowers the state government to appoint Registrars and Sub-registrars for the registration of marriages.<\/span><\/p>\n

                      \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0– It provides the administrative framework for the registration process, ensuring that marriages are recorded in official registers.<\/span><\/p>\n

                      The Constitution of India, 1950:<\/b><\/h1>\n
                        \n
                      • Entries 5 and 30 of List III (Concurrent List):<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                        \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0– Entry 5:Deals with marriage and divorce, infants and minors, adoption, wills, intestacy and succession, joint family and partition, and other related matters.<\/span><\/p>\n

                        \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0– Entry 30:Pertains to vital statistics including registration of births and deaths.<\/span><\/p>\n

                        – These entries authorize both the central and state governments to enact laws on marriage and the registration of vital statistics, providing a constitutional basis for legislation on marriage registration.<\/span><\/p>\n

                        Other Relevant Laws and Practices:<\/b><\/h5>\n
                          \n
                        • State-Specific Laws:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                          \u00a0– The court noted that only a few states, such as Bombay, Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh, and Andhra Pradesh, had laws mandating the compulsory registration of marriages.<\/span><\/p>\n

                          – Voluntary registration of Muslim marriages existed in Assam, Orissa, and West Bengal.<\/span><\/p>\n

                            \n
                          • International Practices:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                            – The court referred to international practices where compulsory registration of marriages is a norm, suggesting that India should adopt similar practices to ensure legal recognition and protection of marital rights.<\/span><\/p>\n

                            Judgment in Smt. Seema v. Ashwani Kumar AIR 2006 SC 1158<\/b><\/p>\n

                            \u00a01. Background and Context:<\/i><\/b><\/h3>\n

                            The Supreme Court of India delivered its judgment in the case of Smt. Seema v. Ashwani Kumar on February 14, 2006. The case addressed the issue of compulsory registration of marriages in India, highlighting the need for a uniform law to ensure legal recognition and protection of marital rights.<\/span><\/p>\n

                              \n
                            1. Key Observations:<\/i><\/b><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
                                \n
                              • Discrepancies in Existing Laws:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                \u00a0\u00a0– The court observed that only a few states, such as Bombay, Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh, and Andhra Pradesh, had laws mandating the compulsory registration of marriages.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                \u00a0\u00a0– Voluntary registration of Muslim marriages existed in Assam, Orissa, and West Bengal.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                \u00a0\u00a0– The court noted the discrepancies and lacunae in marriage registration legislation across different regions in India.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                  \n
                                • Social Issues:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                  \u00a0\u00a0– The court acknowledged the social issues arising from the lack of compulsory registration, such as child marriage, bigamy, and gender violence.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                  \u00a0\u00a0– It emphasized that compulsory registration would help in addressing these issues and protecting the rights of women and children.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                    \n
                                  • Need for Uniform Law:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                    \u00a0\u00a0– The court stressed the importance of having a uniform law for marriage registration applicable to all citizens, irrespective of their religious background.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                    \u00a0\u00a0– A uniform law would eliminate discrepancies and ensure that all marriages are legally documented.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                      \n
                                    1. Court’s Directives:<\/i><\/b><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                      The Supreme Court issued several directives to ensure the compulsory registration of marriages across India:<\/span><\/p>\n

                                        \n
                                      • Directive to Central and State Governments:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                        \u00a0\u00a0– The court directed the central and state governments to take necessary steps to ensure the compulsory registration of marriages.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                        \u00a0\u00a0– It emphasized the need for a uniform legal framework for marriage registration.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                          \n
                                        • Implementation of Rules:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                          \u00a0\u00a0– The court instructed the state governments to frame rules for the compulsory registration of marriages within three months from the date of the judgment.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                          \u00a0\u00a0– The rules should be in accordance with the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and other relevant laws.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                            \n
                                          • Appointment of Registrars:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                            \u00a0\u00a0– The court directed the state governments to appoint Registrars and Sub-registrars for the registration of marriages, as provided under the Registration Act, 1908.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                            \u00a0\u00a0– The Registrars would be responsible for maintaining official registers of marriages.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                              \n
                                            • Awareness and Accessibility:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                              \u00a0\u00a0– The court emphasized the need for creating awareness about the importance of marriage registration among the public.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                              \u00a0\u00a0– It also highlighted the importance of ensuring accessibility to registration facilities, particularly in rural areas.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                \n
                                              1. Constitutional Validity:<\/i><\/b><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
                                                  \n
                                                • Constitutional Principles:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                                  \u00a0\u00a0– The court held that compulsory registration of marriages is in accordance with constitutional principles.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                  \u00a0\u00a0– It referred to Entries 5 and 30 of List III (Concurrent List) of the Constitution, which authorize both the central and state governments to enact laws on marriage and the registration of vital statistics.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                    \n
                                                  • Protection of Rights:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                                    \u00a0\u00a0– The court emphasized that compulsory registration would help in protecting the rights of women, particularly in cases of abandonment, desertion, and domestic violence.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                    \u00a0\u00a0– It would also ensure the legal recognition of children born out of wedlock and secure their inheritance rights.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                      \n
                                                    1. International Perspective:<\/i><\/b><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
                                                        \n
                                                      • Reference to International Practices:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                                        \u00a0\u00a0– The court referred to international practices where compulsory registration of marriages is a norm.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                        \u00a0\u00a0– It argued that India should adopt similar practices to ensure legal recognition and protection of marital rights.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                        Summary:<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

                                                        – The Supreme Court recognized the need for a uniform law for compulsory marriage registration applicable to all citizens.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                        – The court issued directives to the central and state governments to ensure the compulsory registration of marriages and to frame rules within three months.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                        – The court emphasized the importance of creating awareness and ensuring accessibility to registration facilities.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                        – The judgment aimed to address social issues such as child marriage, bigamy, and gender violence, and to protect the rights of women and children.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                        – The court held that compulsory registration of marriages is in accordance with constitutional principles and referred to international practices to support its decision.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                        The judgment in Smt. Seema v. Ashwani Kumar was a landmark decision that highlighted the necessity of compulsory marriage registration in India and paved the way for the development of a more comprehensive legal framework in this regard.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                        Analysis:\u00a0<\/b><\/h2>\n

                                                        Considering the current situation, this landmark judgement played a significant role in upholding the rights of many women and girls across the country. By making marriage registration mandatory, the Supreme Court\u00a0 not only tried to fill a gap in the law that existed till then but also tried to combat to some extent the social evil of child marriage that is rampant in our country. Following this judgement, in 2012, the Delhi High Court\u00a0 also upheld compulsory registration of marriages, observing that “Compulsory registration of marriages, as the age has to be recorded in writing, will deter guardians from marrying minor children and thus establish illegality.” ((Raja Devi v. State NCT Delhi 2012 SCC OnLine Del 3937.)) As aptly argued by the National Commission for Women in its affidavit, the law on compulsory registration of marriages needs to be implemented not only as evidence of the solemnity of the marriage but also to protect young girls from child marriage as registration ensures that the minimum age required by law is met. Upheld. Other benefits of such a law cited by the National Commission for Women include that spouses will not be forced to consent to marriage, children will not be sold by their parents\u00a0 for money on the pretext of marriage, and the practices of bigamy and polygamy will be prevented. , Married women are empowered to claim their rights in the conjugal family and widows can claim rights such as inheritance after the death of their husbands. At the beginning of the hearing, the case seemed to be a simple war of the sexes case that arose from numerous disagreements between the couple, which led to numerous arguments between them. However, as the hearing progressed, it became clear to the court that there were much more serious problems\u00a0 in the country due to legal loopholes.\u00a0 In my opinion, by passing\u00a0 this judgment, the Supreme Court has rightly made marriage registration mandatory.\u00a0 Then, in 2005, the federal government introduced a bill called the Compulsory Marriage Registration Bill, 2005. This bill provides for providing information about welfare systems and related laws to the\u00a0 citizens of\u00a0 the country.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                        Conclusion:<\/b><\/h2>\n

                                                        According to Hindu law, marriage is a sacrament\u00a0 performed and solemnized in accordance with the customs, rites and rituals\u00a0 of the spouses. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is applicable to all Hindus, including Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists. As per Section 5 of the Act, there are some important conditions that must be fulfilled by both the bride and groom to enter into a valid marriage. Only when these conditions are fulfilled and the wedding ceremony is performed as per the customs, the marriage will be considered valid. However, the mandatory conditions did not mention making marriage registration mandatory. The Act allowed state governments to make suitable regulations regarding registration and provide for compulsory registration only if the state so desired.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                        This provision acted as an escape clause for many as without registration the existence of marriage would be questioned and would be difficult to prove due to\u00a0 lack of records submitted to the authorities, leading to\u00a0 husbands denying their wife their conjugal rights.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

                                                        By passing this landmark judgement, the Supreme Court not only protected married women who were in distress and were denied their conjugal rights like right to live in the matrimonial home, right to maintenance etc., but also protected minor girls from atrocities like child abuse, sale by\u00a0 parents under the guise of marriage, forced marriage without consent etc. This judgement is just one in countless examples of the tenacious and tireless efforts of the judiciary to uphold the rights of the people\u00a0 by interpreting legal provisions accurately and thus preventing the evils of\u00a0 society.<\/span><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                                                        Citation: AIR 2006 SC 1158 Author Anusha Srivastava from Prestige Institute Of Management\u00a0 Supreme Court of India Names\u00a0of Parties: Petitioner: Smt. Seema; Respondent: Ashwani Kumar Hon’ble Judges: Justice Arijit Pasayat; Justice S.H. Kapadia Date of Judgment: 14 February, 2006 Subject: Transfer Petition (Civil)\u00a0291 of 2005 INTRODUCTION Is\u00a0 marriage a contract or a sacrament? When discussing […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":3966,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_themeisle_gutenberg_block_has_review":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[98],"tags":[130],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawjurist.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3996"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawjurist.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawjurist.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawjurist.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawjurist.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3996"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/lawjurist.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3996\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4004,"href":"https:\/\/lawjurist.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3996\/revisions\/4004"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawjurist.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3966"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawjurist.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3996"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawjurist.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3996"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawjurist.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3996"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}