Belonging To Scheduled Tribe Doesn't Bar Divorce Under Hindu Marriage Act Without Established Custom: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court upheld an order dismissing a wife's Order 7 Rule 11 CPC application seeking rejection of her husband's divorce plea filed under Hindu Marriage Act (HMA), on the ground that they belonged to Scheduled Tribe and thus the HMA was not applicable.The division bench of Justice Sudesh Bansal and Justice Anil Kumar Upman observed that there was no mention of any prevailing custom of the Community for solemnization of marriage which was different from the ceremonies performed by Hindus. Further, the Court highlighted that it was not pleaded that the ceremonies followed by Hindus as per rites envisaged under HMA was not followed in the Community."Surprisingly, in her application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, in paras No. 9 & 10, wife has mentioned that marriage between parties was solemnized as per customs of Meena community. Nevertheless, it has been noticed that neither the manner of any prevailing custom of Meena community for solemnization of marriage, in a different manner and procedure as followed by Hindus has been mentioned nor, it has been pleaded that the marriage ceremonies performed by Hindus as per rites and ceremonies envisaged under Hindu Marriage Act, are not followed in the Meena community. Thus, the objection of wife, based on prevailing of any customs in Meena community, is ambiguous and vague," the bench said. The Court was hearing an appeal filed by a wife challenging Family Court's order of rejecting her application seeking dismissal of the divorce petition filed by the husband. This was opposed by the husband who argued that even though they belonged to the Meena community, they were Hindus and had followed similar rites and ceremonies for marriage as envisaged under the HMA. After hearing the contentions, the Court also took into account the fact that the wife had herself admitted that their marriage was solemnized as per the Hindu rites and ceremonies. She herself had also taken resort to HMA by filing an application under Section 9 of the Act, for restitution of conjugal rights. The Court highlighted that the objection of the wife based on customs in Meena Community was ambiguous and vague without any specifications. “…wife has not made it clear as to what Custom was/is prevailing in the Meena Community, for marriage, dissolution of marriages etc., which attracts applicability of Section 2(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, to deprive the husband to file divorce petition under Section 13(1)(a) of Hindu Marriage Act. More so when wife herself has taken resort to Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act by filing a separate petition for restitution of conjugal rights.”In this background, the Court held that Family Court did not err in rejecting the application filed by the wife. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed. Title: X v YCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 114For Appellants: Mr. Ajay Shukla; Ms. Jyoti Sharma; Mr. Raghav Sharma; Mr. Shivam SharmaFor Respondents: Mr. Pawan Sharma; Mr. Ayush Bansal; Mr. Akshay Yadav for Mr. Ashok BansalClick Here To Read/Download Order

Belonging To Scheduled Tribe Doesn't Bar Divorce Under Hindu Marriage Act Without Established Custom: Rajasthan High Court

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Belonging To Scheduled Tribe Doesn't Bar Divorce Under Hindu Marriage Act Without Established Custom: Rajasthan High Court

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers