An alleged case of fraud has come to light during the Chief Minister’s Mass Marriage Scheme in Uttar Pradesh’s Kaushambi district, where biometric fingerprint verification reportedly exposed a mismatch between the registered groom and the individual present at the wedding ceremony. Based on a complaint, police have registered a case against three people and initiated an investigation. The district administration has also cancelled the marriage registration with immediate effect and ordered a comprehensive inquiry. All allegations remain under investigation, and no conclusions have been reached at this stage.
The incident occurred in the Saini police station area of Sirathu tehsil during a government-organised mass marriage programme in which around 230 couples participated. According to the preliminary investigation, the bride’s marriage had already been fixed with a man from Rae Bareli, with their wedding scheduled for March 17, 2027. Despite this, authorities allege that she was also registered under the Chief Minister’s Mass Marriage Scheme.
Officials said the originally registered groom was unable to attend the programme due to unspecified reasons. Investigators allege that the bride’s family then persuaded another young man from the same village to sit in the wedding ceremony by offering him part of the dowry. During the event, authorities conducted mandatory biometric fingerprint verification of both the bride and groom. While the bride’s fingerprints matched the official records, the fingerprints of the man accompanying her failed to match the registered data, immediately raising suspicion and leading to the alleged fraud being uncovered.
Following the discrepancy, officials halted the process, handed the young man over to the police and cancelled the marriage registration on the spot. The district administration has since ordered a detailed inquiry to determine how the alleged irregularity occurred despite the registration and verification procedures in place.
According to police, the FIR was registered following a complaint by Shivam Valmiki, the brother of the youth allegedly used as the substitute groom. In his complaint, he alleged that his approximately 16-year-old brother, Sunny Valmiki, was lured into participating in the ceremony after being promised half of the dowry. He further alleged that photographs were taken during the ceremony to create the appearance of a legitimate marriage. The complaint accuses Quraishan Bano, Nagma Bano and Amarjeet Maurya of conspiring to fraudulently obtain financial assistance available under the government’s mass marriage scheme. Police are verifying these allegations as part of the ongoing investigation.
District officials stated that records confirmed the bride and her intended groom had already been registered under the scheme. However, after the registered groom failed to appear, authorities allegedly discovered that another individual had taken his place in the marriage ceremony. Based on these findings, the registration was immediately cancelled and a departmental investigation was initiated to examine whether there were any procedural lapses or deliberate attempts to misuse the welfare scheme.
Renowned cybercrime expert and former IPS officer Prof. Triveni Singh said that biometric authentication and digital identity verification play a critical role in preventing fraud in government welfare programmes. He noted that the timely mismatch detected through fingerprint verification demonstrated the effectiveness of technology-driven verification systems in identifying identity-related irregularities. He added that digital authentication should always be complemented by multi-layer document verification and physical scrutiny to minimise the risk of fraudulent claims and misuse of public welfare funds.
Police and district authorities have stated that the investigation is continuing. Officials said if evidence reveals the involvement of additional individuals, appropriate legal action will be taken in accordance with the law. The allegations remain subject to investigation and judicial scrutiny, and the legal responsibility of those involved will ultimately be determined by the competent court.
