Arya Samaj Certificate Alone Not Proof Of Valid Marriage: Madhya Pradesh High Court Holds Union Void For Lack Of Saptapadi

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has set aside a Family Court order declaring a woman as the legally wedded wife of a man, noting that the marriage cannot be recognised under the Hindu Marriage Act if essential ceremonies including sacred fire, pheras or saptpadi, were not performed. In doing so, the division bench of Justice Anand Pathak and Justice Hirdesh observed that the Family Court erred in treating the Arya Samaj certificate and register entry as conclusive proof of the existence of a valid marriage. It further observed that in Hindu religion marriage is a sacrament and it is not an event for mere “song and dance” or “wining and dining.” The court said that Hindu marriage is conducted as per Vedic procedure and any Hindu marriage solemnized as per such procedure constitutes a valid marriage if it fulfills Section 7 of Hindu Marriage Act.The family court had dismissed the man's suit seeking a declaration that the respondent was not his legally wedded wife.The bench observed; "On perusal of evidence of both parties as well as impugned record, it reveals that witnesses...of Arya Samaj, as well as respondent herself, never stated that Saptpadi or any other essential ceremony was performed. The photographs produced on behalf of respondent before the Trial Court do not depict any sacred fire, pheras, or Saptpadi. There is no evidence that both parties were followers of the Arya Samaj or that rituals prescribed under the Arya Marriage Validation Act were followed. Consequently, material on record fails to establish factum of valid “Hindu marriage” as defined under Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act...Therefore, it is found that the Trial Court erred in treating Arya Samaj certificate (Ex.D-3) and register entry (Ex.D-4) as conclusive proof of marriage. Essential ceremonies of Hindu marriage, particularly Saptpadi, were not proved". The bench noted that the pivotal issue was whether the marriage was solemnised per the provisions of section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The bench noted from the witness's statement that without obtaining a divorce from AS, the respondent's marriage with the appellant was void and in violation of Section 5 of the HMA. Emphasizing the sacrament and sacred character of marriages in the Hindu religion, the bench highlighted;"In Hindu religion, marriage is a sacrament and has a sacred character. Marriage is not an event for mere “song and dance” or “wining and dining.” Hindu marriage is conducted as per Vedic procedure, which includes customs and rites such as Kanyadana, Panigrahan, Saptapadi, and chanting of mantras while applying vermilion. Any Hindu marriage solemnized in accordance with Vedic procedure constitutes a valid marriage if it fulfills requirements of Section 7 of Hindu Marriage Act. Hindu marriage facilitates procreation, consolidates unit of family, and strengthens spirit of fraternity within various communities. Marriage is sacred in that it provides a lifelong, dignity-affirming, equal, consensual, and healthy union of two individuals, acknowledging both material and spiritual aspects of lives of married couple". Per the facts, the appellant (plaintiff), a 75-year-old retired company commander who lost his wife and had one son and two daughters. He published an advertisement in the Dainik Bhaskar newspaper seeking a bride for his son. After this advertisement, the respondent contacted him and began visiting his house. He alleged that the respondent took undue advantage of his loneliness and started blackmailing him. The respondent allegedly concealed her previous marriages and managed to obtain a fabricated marriage certificate dated March 26, 2012, from Arya Samaj Mandir showing her marriage to the appellant. He asserted that the respondent was already married, as revealed during her arrest on February 19, 2013, but during her arrest, she disclosed the name of her husband. A chargesheet was filed under Section 370(2) of the IPC and Sections 4 to 8 of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, also mentioning her husband's name.The appellant contended that by giving false and misleading statements, the respondent obtained a marriage certificate from the Registrar of Marriages, showing a marriage with him on March 26, 2012, even though her former husband was alive. He further argued that the respondent is in the habit of blackmailing and of having more than one husband at a time to obtain unlawful monetary benefits, including pensionary benefits. He sought cancellation of the alleged fake and forged marriage certificates. He sought a declaration that the respondent was not his legally wedded wife. The respondent, however, denied all allegations, contending that the suit was not maintainable as no notice under Section 80(2) of CPC was ever served before filing the suit. She further contended that the advertisement published in the newspaper was fabricated. The trial court dismissed the appellant's suit and held that the burden of proving allegations laid upon him and he had...

Arya Samaj Certificate Alone Not Proof Of Valid Marriage: Madhya Pradesh High Court Holds Union Void For Lack Of Saptapadi

Jayanti Pahwa

Tags