Dolly Rani v. Manish Kumar Chanchal  

Court – The Supreme Court of India

Citation – 2024 SCC OnLine SC 754

Bench – B.V. Nagarathna and Augustine George Masih, JJ.

Introduction

Unlike in other religions, a Hindu marriage is not a civil contract but is one of the sixteen essential samskaras(sanskaras) which is meant not only for the satisfaction of sexual desires and procreation of children but also for a holy matrimonial union of two individuals that is said to be valid till eternity. Despite the presence of some elements of contract in the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955, a Hindu marriage is still more of a sacrament which connotes a permanent pious fusion of not just two individuals but also two families. It was in the case of Tekait Mon Mohini v. Basanta Kumar Singh¹ in which the Calcutta High Court, while construing the spiritual essence of a Hindu marriage, observed that a Hindu marriage is an indissoluble union of flesh with flesh and bone with bone that would continue even in the afterlife. However, a Hindu marriage will not be binding for life until and unless it is duly performed with proper religious rites and rituals as mandated by section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955. In other words, solemnization is a sine qua non for a valid Hindu marriage. This indispensable prerequisite is reflected by this prominent case which highlights the fact that a Hindu marriage, which is not celebrated with necessary customary practices and ceremonies of either party to that marriage, is not a marriage at all in the eyes of the law.

Facts

In this case, both the petitioner wife and the respondent husband were professionally trained commercial pilots who got married in July 2021 and obtained the marriage certificate from Vadik Jankalyan Samiti and subsequently a certificate of registration of marriage under the Uttar Pradesh Marriage Registration Rules of 2017. However, the actual marriage function, in accordance with the customary ceremonies of the parties, was scheduled to be performed on October 25, 2022, but it did not take place as certain disputes emerged between the parties with the passage of time. The petitioner initiated criminal proceedings against the respondent and his relatives. Thereafter, the respondent filed a petition for divorce on account of cruelty in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Muzaffarpur, Bihar. Annoyed by this, the petitioner filed a transfer petition to seek the transfer of that divorce petition to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi, Jharkhand. Meanwhile, both the petitioner and the respondent reached a mutual consensus to file a joint application in the apex court under Article 142 of the Indian Constitution, requesting it to declare their marriage, which apparently took place on July 7, 2021 as ultravires.

Issues

The questions of law involved in this case were –

• Whether the marriage between the parties is legally valid, if it was registered under section 8 but was not performed in conformity with section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?
• Whether the parties have acquired the status of spouses since 07/07/2021?
• Whether the certificates issued to the parties pertaining to their purported marriage dated 07.07.2021 are of any legal significance?

Petitioner’s Arguments

The petitioner wife levelled allegations against her husband and in-laws of dowry demands and harassment being made by the respondent’s family. Consequently, she lodged an FIR against the respondent and his family members under relevant sections of the Dowry Prohibition Act of 1961 and under sections 498A(which deals with cruelty), 420(which deals with cheating), 506(which deals with criminal intimidation), 509(which deals with outraging the modesty of a woman) and section 34(which deals with common intention) of the Indian Penal Code of 1860.

Respondent’s Arguments 

The respondent husband filed a divorce petition on the ground of cruelty under section 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 in the Family Court of Muzaffarpur, Bihar in response to which the aggrieved petitioner filed a transfer petition under section 25 of the Civil Procedure Code,1908, seeking to transfer that divorce petition to the Family Court of Ranchi, Jharkhand where the wife was residing at that time along with her parents.

Mutual Contention

During the pendency of the transfer petition, both the parties mutually agreed and decided to move a joint application under Article 142 of the Indian Constitution before the apex court to seek a formal declaration that their purported marriage dated 07.07.2021 is a nullity.

Judgement

The division bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in this landmark case, delivered its judgement on April 19, 2024 in which the apex Court quashed the First Information Report and the maintenance suit filed by the petitioner wife as well as the divorce proceedings initiated by the respondent husband.

The apex court, by exercising its inherent powers under Article 142 of the Indian Constitution to do complete justice, declared that the marriage in dispute between the petitioner and the respondent dated 07.07.2021 fails the test of validity as it was merely on paper, i.e., it was not properly performed in due form by adhering to the customs and traditions of either party to the marriage, and thus the marriage certificate as well as the certificate of registration of marriage issued to the parties were also declared to be null and void with immediate effect. Besides, the court held that both the parties to the marriage have never gained the marital status of being a husband and a wife to each other as there existed no valid wedlock between them in the first place.

The apex court further added that the registration under section 8 alone cannot award legitimacy to a marriage which has not been solemnised in compliance with section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955.

Furthermore, the apex court observed that a Hindu marriage is a sacrosanct institution and not a business transaction. It is not an occasion for singing and dancing nor a forum for exchange of dowry gifts rather it is a solemn foundational event which is celebrated so as to establish a relationship between a man and a woman who subsequently assume the marital status of a husband and a wife respectively.

Conclusion

In a nutshell, it can be inferred from the above case analysis that registration merely furnishes the proof of a Hindu marriage but does not testify its validity. The Supreme Court of India, through this case, criticised the general practice of young couples to register their marriage under section 8 for the sake of visa applications, emigration to foreign countries, etc. without solemnising or celebrating it with relevant rites, rituals, customs and ceremonies of either party such as Saptapadi, Kanyadaan, Sagai, Pani Grahan, Vivaha Homa, etc. as necessitated by section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955. This case reaffirms the sanctity of a Hindu marriage as a consecrated institution and construes it as the basic unit of a Hindu family system. The apex court also abominates this new trend which is largely being followed by the parents to get the marriage of their children registered without celebrating it or postponing its solemnization to a subsequent date in the future which may be for a variety of reasons like to expedite the union of the couple or to save their financial resources. In any case, the cultural significance of the institution of marriage is being trivialized. Prior to this, the apex court long before in the case of Surjit Kaur v. Garja Singh² articulated that mere prolonged cohabitation without the observance of any requisite rites and customs does not amount to a valid Hindu marriage.

Therefore, the Supreme Court, through its verdict in this recent and renowned case of Dolly Rani v. Manish Kumar Chanchal, reinforced section 7 which took precedence over section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955.

References

[1] (1901) ILR 28 CAL 751

[2] (1994) 1 SCC 407