In response to a woman’s appeal, the Delhi High Court affirmed the legality of a Hindu Marriage Act, the provision that forbids marriages between parents’ ancestors unless custom allows.
Topics
Sapinda Marriages
This week, the Delhi High Court denied a challenge to the validity of Section 5(v) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA), which forbids marriage between two Hindus if they are “spindles” (unless their respective customs or usages permit it).
The court stated in its ruling on January 22 that “if a decision of a spouse in the wedding is left uncontrolled, a sexually explicit relationship may gain credibility” in response to a demand issued by a woman who had been attempting for a long time to have this provision smashed down.
What are the requirements for Hindu Marriage?
The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 established requirements for Hindu marriages in Section 5. Any two Hindus may get married as long as the requirements listed below are met:
- At the period of the marriage, neither party had a spouse
- Neither party was insane or a fool.
- At the time of the marriage, the groom of the wedding was twenty-one years old and the bride was eighteen.
- The parties were not in a relationship that was forbidden unless the traditions or practices regulating each of them allowed for a marriage between a couple.
- Unless their respective customs or usages allow for a marriage between them, both individuals are not Sapindas of one another.
What is Sapinda’s Marriage?
A marriage between two people who are somewhat related to another individual is known as a Sapinda marriage. Section 3 of the Act defines Sapinda relations for the objectives of the HMA.
According to Section 3(f)(ii), two individuals are considered to be sapindas of one another if one of these individuals is a lineal dominant of the other within the parameters of the sapinda connection, or if they have a typical lineal dominant who is within the parameters of the sapinda relationship concerning each person.
A Hindu is not allowed to marry anybody within a period of three generations on the side of their mother or anybody within five generations on their dad’s side, involving the parents or grandparents of their grandparents on their father’s side, according to the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA).
A marriage will be deemed null and void if it is determined that it violates Section 5(v) because it is a Sapinda marriage and no recognized custom permits such a practice. This would imply that the wedding was never legitimate in the first place and that it will be regarded as such.
What was the reason for challenging the law?
In 2007, the woman’s marriage was ruled unenforceable due to her husband’s successful demonstration that they were married in a Sapinda marriage and that the woman did not come from an environment where such marriages were accepted as the norm.
The Delhi High Court heard an appeal against this decision and rejected it in October 2023. The woman then went before the HC once more, arguing that the ban on Sapinda marriages was unconstitutional.
She maintained that even in cases where there is no documentation of custom, Sapinda marriages are common. Therefore, Section 5(v), which forbids Sapinda marriages absent a recognized custom, infringes upon Section 14 of the Constitution’s guarantee of equality.
The petitioner further contended that the marriage’s credibility was established by the approval of both families.
What was said by the High Court?
Hindu Marriage Act (HMA) Section 5(v) forbids weddings between “Sapindas” unless permitted by tradition or usage, and the Delhi High Court has supported this ruling. The court decided that selecting a spouse in a marriage is unrestricted, which could result in incestuous relationships.
A woman’s appeal contesting the constitutionality of Section 5(v) of the HMA which was held to be a violation of the 14th Article of the Constitution was rejected by the court. Her contentions were rejected by the Delhi High Court.
A bench made up of Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora and Temporary Chief Justice Manmohan determined that the petitioner had not shown “extremely strict proof” of an established tradition, which is required to support a Sapinda marriage.
The court further observed that no legally sound defenses were offered to contest the clause. The woman is now able to file a lawsuit against her ex-husband.
To Get Relevant Content, Visit GMR Homepage.