No Hindu Marriage Deemed Valid Until 'Saptapadi' Is Performed: Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has observed that in Hindu law, marriage is not a contract and unless and until Saptapadi is performed, there cannot be said to be a valid marriage.With this, a bench of Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia dismissed a plea filed by 4 petitioners seeking to quash an FIR lodged against them for offences under Sections 366 (abducting or inducing woman to compel...
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has observed that in Hindu law, marriage is not a contract and unless and until Saptapadi is performed, there cannot be said to be a valid marriage.
With this, a bench of Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia dismissed a plea filed by 4 petitioners seeking to quash an FIR lodged against them for offences under Sections 366 (abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage), 498- A (cruelty), 34 (common intention) of IPC.
The petitioners were alleged to have abducted the prosecutrix/victim, forcibly bringing her to Jabalpur. Subsequently, they took her to the High Court premises and coerced her into signing specific documents pertaining to the marriage of the victim and petitioner no. 1.
Seeking to quash the FIR, the counsel for the petitioners argued that a marriage (between victim and petitioner no. 1) had been performed by following the ritual of exchange of garland (Varmala) and filling up of Maang with vermilion (Sindoor). A marriage certificate was also produced to fortify their claim of marriage.
However, in its order, the Court noted that counsel for petitioners could not point out any provision of law which acknowledges the performance of marriage by exchange of garland (Varmala). The court also emphasized on the importance of performance of Saptapadi for a valid Hindu marriage.
Against this backdrop, the Court opined that the ground raised by counsel for petitioners that petitioner No.1 as well as prosecutrix are validly married couple, cannot be accepted specifically in the light of the statement made by the victim about her abduction
The Court further observed that, in accordance with the prosecutrix's allegations, she was forcibly transported to Jabalpur and coerced into signing certain documents and hence, considering the contentions outlined in the FIR, it was evident that these allegations constituted a prima facie case of a cognizable offense.
"Even otherwise, it is well established principle of law that this Court in exercise of power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C./ Article 226/227 of Constitution of India should not kill an unborn baby and should not bring the investigation to a halt and by restraining the respondents/ Police from collecting the evidence," the Court further observed.
Under these circumstances, the Court noted that no case was made out warranting interference and hence, the petition was dismissed.
Case title - Ajay Kumar Jain and others vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others
Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (MP) 13
Click Here To Read/Download Order