Supreme Court Declares Marriage Void Due to Lack of Proper Rites: Dolly Rani vs. Manish Kumar Chanchal (2024)

Introduction

Date of the Judgment: April 19, 2024

Citation: 2024 INSC 355

Judges: B.V. Nagarathna, J and Augustine George Masih, J.

Can a marriage certificate validate a Hindu marriage if the required religious ceremonies were not performed? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this crucial question in a case where a couple obtained a marriage certificate without fulfilling the essential rituals. This judgment clarifies the significance of traditional rites in Hindu marriages and the limitations of mere registration. The bench comprised Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Augustine George Masih, with the opinion being delivered by Justice B.V. Nagarathna.

Case Background

Dolly Rani (the petitioner) and Manish Kumar Chanchal (the respondent), both trained commercial pilots, were engaged on March 7, 2021. They claimed to have married on July 7, 2021, obtaining a marriage certificate from Vadik Jankalyan Samiti (Regd.) and a “Certificate of Registration of Marriage” under the Uttar Pradesh Marriage Registration Rules, 2017. However, their families planned a traditional Hindu wedding ceremony for October 25, 2022. Differences arose between them, and the petitioner alleged dowry demands by the respondent’s family.

On November 17, 2022, the petitioner filed a First Information Report (FIR) against the respondent and his family under Sections 498A, 420, 506, 509, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Subsequently, on March 13, 2023, the respondent filed a divorce petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in the Family Court at Muzaffarpur, Bihar. The petitioner, residing in Ranchi, Jharkhand, then filed a transfer petition seeking to move the divorce case to Ranchi.

Timeline

Course of Proceedings

The petitioner filed a transfer petition seeking to move the divorce proceedings from Muzaffarpur, Bihar, to Ranchi, Jharkhand. During the pendency of this petition, both parties agreed to resolve the dispute and filed a joint application under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. They sought a declaration that their marriage was not valid in the eyes of the law, as no proper Hindu marriage ceremonies were performed.

Legal Framework

The Supreme Court referred to Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which outlines the ceremonies for a Hindu marriage.

Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 states:

“7. Ceremonies for a Hindu marriage. —(1) A Hindu marriage may be solemnized in accordance with the customary rites and ceremonies of either party thereto. (2) Where such rites and ceremonies include the Saptapadi (that is, the taking of seven steps by the bridegroom and the bride jointly before the sacred fire), the marriage becomes complete and binding when the seventh step is taken.”

The Court emphasized that the term “solemnized” in Section 7(1) means performing the marriage with proper ceremonies. It further noted that Section 7(2) specifies that if the rites include “Saptapadi” (taking seven steps before the sacred fire), the marriage becomes complete when the seventh step is taken. The court clarified that for a valid Hindu marriage, the ceremonies must be performed, and there should be proof of such performance.

The court also discussed Section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which deals with the registration of Hindu marriages:

“8. Registration of Hindu marriages. —(1) For the purpose of facilitating the proof of Hindu marriages, the State Government may make rules providing that the parties to any such marriage may have the particulars relating to their marriage entered in such manner and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed in a Hindu Marriage Register kept for the purpose. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the State Government may, if it is of opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do, provide that the entering of the particulars referred to in sub-section (1) shall be compulsory in the State or in any part thereof, whether in all cases or in such cases as may be specified, and where any such direction has been issued, any person contravening any rule made in this behalf shall be punishable with fine which may extend to twenty-five rupees. (3) All rules made under this section shall be laid before the State Legislature, as soon as may be, after they are made. (4) The Hindu Marriage Register shall at all reasonable times be open for inspection, and shall be admissible as evidence of the statements therein contained and certified extracts therefrom shall, on application, be given by the Registrar on payment to him of the prescribed fee. (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, the validity of any Hindu marriage shall in no way be affected by the omission to make the entry.”

The Court clarified that registration under Section 8 is intended to facilitate proof of a valid Hindu marriage that has been solemnized according to Section 7. It does not validate a marriage if the essential ceremonies were not performed. The Court also highlighted Section 4 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 which gives overriding effect to the Act.

“4. Overriding effect of the Act. – Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, – (a) any text, rule or interpretation of Hindu law or any custom or usage as part of that law in force immediately before the commencement of this Act shall cease to have effect with respect to any matter for which provision is made in this Act; (b) any other law in force immediately before the commencement of this Act shall cease to have effect insofar as it is inconsistent with any of the provisions contained in this Act.”

Arguments

The petitioner’s counsel argued that since there was no valid marriage under Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the respondent could not seek a divorce decree. The respondent’s counsel admitted that the essential ceremonies were not performed, but the respondent had filed the divorce petition because the “marriage” was registered.

Both parties jointly submitted that they seek a declaration that their marriage on 07.07.2021 was not a valid marriage as per law and consequently the certificates issued on that date by Vadik Jankalyan Samiti (Regd.) and under the Uttar Pradesh Registration Rules, 2017 are null and void.

The parties further submitted that they had filed the joint application under Article 142 of the Constitution of India on their own free will without any coercion.

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court did not frame specific issues in this case. However, the core issue was whether a marriage could be considered valid under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, if the essential ceremonies were not performed, despite the issuance of marriage certificates.

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

Authorities

The Court considered the following legal provisions:

• Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: Specifies the ceremonies required for a valid Hindu marriage, emphasizing the importance of customary rites and the Saptapadi.
• Section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: Deals with the registration of Hindu marriages to facilitate proof of marriage but does not validate a marriage if essential ceremonies are not performed.
• Section 4 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: Gives overriding effect to the Act and repeals all existing laws inconsistent with the Act.

Judgment

The Court observed that:

• The marriage certificate from Vadik Jankalyan Samiti (Regd.) did not indicate that the necessary rites and customs were followed.
• The certificate issued under the Uttar Pradesh Marriage Registration Rules, 2017, was based on the certificate from Vadik Jankalyan Samiti (Regd.) and was thus invalid.
• A Hindu marriage is a sacrament and has a sacred character.
• The intent of the Parliament is that there should be only one form of marriage having varied rites and customs and rituals.
• A man and woman cannot acquire the status of husband and wife unless the marriage is performed with proper ceremonies.

The Court declared the marriage void and quashed the divorce petition, maintenance case, and criminal case filed by the parties against each other.

The Court stated:

“In the circumstances, we declare that the ‘marriage’ dated 07.07.2021 between the parties is not a ‘Hindu marriage’ having regard to the provisions of Section 7 of the Act.”

“Consequently, the certificate issued by the Vadik Jankalyan Samiti (Regd.) dated 07.07.2021 is declared null and void. In view of the above the Certificate issued under the Uttar Pradesh Registration Rules, 2017 dated 07.07.2021 is also declared null and void.”

“In view of the aforesaid declaration, it is further declared that the petitioner and the respondent were not married in accordance with the provisions of the Act and therefore, they have never acquired the status of husband and wife.”

The court emphasized that the promises made to each other by the parties to a Hindu marriage and the oath taken by them to remain friends forever lay the foundation for a life-long commitment between the spouses.

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Supreme Court’s decision was primarily influenced by the fundamental requirements of a valid Hindu marriage as outlined in Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Court emphasized that a Hindu marriage is a sacred institution and not a mere formality. The absence of proper ceremonies, specifically the Saptapadi, was a critical factor in the Court’s decision to declare the marriage void. The Court also expressed concern over the increasing trend of couples registering their marriages without performing the essential rituals, often for practical purposes like visa applications. This practice was strongly deprecated by the Court. The Court also highlighted the significance of the promises made by the parties to a Hindu marriage and the oath taken by them to remain friends forever.

Key Takeaways

• A Hindu marriage is not valid unless the essential ceremonies, including Saptapadi, are performed.
• Registration of a marriage under Section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is only for proof and does not validate a marriage if the essential ceremonies are not performed.
• Marriage certificates issued without the performance of proper ceremonies are invalid.
• The Supreme Court has deprecated the practice of registering marriages without proper ceremonies for convenience.
• The promises made to each other by the parties to a Hindu marriage and the oath taken by them to remain friends forever lay the foundation for a life-long commitment between the spouses.

Directions

The Supreme Court directed that the divorce petition, maintenance case, and criminal case filed by the parties against each other be quashed.

Development of Law

The ratio decidendi of this case is that a Hindu marriage is not valid unless the essential ceremonies, including Saptapadi, are performed as per Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. This judgment reinforces the importance of traditional rites in Hindu marriages and clarifies that mere registration is not sufficient to validate a marriage. This is not a change in the previous position of law but rather a reiteration of the existing legal position.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s judgment in Dolly Rani vs. Manish Kumar Chanchal emphasizes the sanctity of Hindu marriage ceremonies. The Court declared the marriage between the parties void because the essential rituals were not performed, despite the existence of marriage certificates. This ruling underscores the importance of adhering to traditional customs and the limitations of relying solely on registration for validating a Hindu marriage. The Court also deprecated the practice of registering marriages without proper ceremonies.