[S.13 HMA] Marriage Of Minor Girl With Major Male May Cause Physical & Mental Crutely, Can Be Used As Grounds For Divorce: MP High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court at its Indore bench held that in cases where a minor female has been married to a major male, their marriage could be declared voidable under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA).Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi stated that even if the remedy is not present under Section 11 or 12, under Section 13 of HMA, divorce can be claimed...
The Madhya Pradesh High Court at its Indore bench held that in cases where a minor female has been married to a major male, their marriage could be declared voidable under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA).
Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi stated that even if the remedy is not present under Section 11 or 12, under Section 13 of HMA, divorce can be claimed on grounds of the minor woman being married to a major and it will fall under the term cruelty.
“Even otherwise, it is a case of cruelty also, the marriage of a minor girl with a major male will cause mental as well as physical cruelty as she was not ready to perform the martial obligations, therefore, under Section 13 of HMA also she could have claimed the divorce from the husband / respondent”
The court further said that the appellant should have filed under Section 3 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (PCMA) and not HMA.
The court stated that“by ignorance of the law, the decree of declaration of marriage void was sought under Sections 5, 11 and 12 of HMA instead of Section 3 of PCMA, 2006. This Child Marriage Act has been enacted with aims and objects to make provision to declare child marriage as voidable and give a legitimate status of a child born out of such marriage to empower the Court to issue injunctions prohibiting solemnization of the marriage of a minor child.”
It further stated, "The PCMA, 2006, specifically mandates that every child marriage shall be voidable at the option of the contracting party who was a child at the time of marriage, provided that the petition is filed under the correct legal framework."
Background
The appellant and respondent got married as per Hindu customs and rituals and at the time of the marriage, the appellant was only 15 years old. She later claimed that the Respondent had hidden the fact that he was blind in one eye. After the marriage the appellant continued to live with her parents and eventually filed a suit under Sections 11 and 12 of the HMA, seeking a decree for the marriage to be declared either void or voidable.
The Additional District Judge Ujjain dismissed the suit stating that the marriage could not be declared void or voidable under the HMA, as Section 12 does not cover the breach of age requirements specified in Section 5(iii) of the Act.
In the present case, counsel for the appellant argued that under Section 5 of the HMA, certain conditions must be met for a Hindu marriage to be considered valid. One of these conditions, Clause (iii), specifies that the bride should be at least 18 years old at the time of the marriage. Since the appellant was a minor at the time of the marriage, the marriage should be declared voidable under Section 12 of the HMA.
Further, there was a reference by the counsel to the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (PCMA), which states that any child marriage, whether solemnized before or after the commencement of the Act, is voidable at the option of the contracting party who was a child at the time of the marriage.
It was contended that the lower court did not consider the impact of the PCMA on the case. Counsel cited judgments from the Supreme Court and other High Courts to support his argument that the marriage should be declared void.
The respondent argued that the HMA does not permit the annulment of a marriage on the basis of a breach of Clause (iii) of Section 5. He contended that the law only prescribes punishment for contravening this provision and does not provide grounds for nullifying the marriage. He urged the court to dismiss the appeal, as the marriage could not be declared voidable under the current legal framework.
The High Court declared the marriage null and void but noted that while the HMA outlines the conditions for a valid marriage, it does not provide grounds for declaring a marriage void or voidable solely on the basis of the age of the bride or groom.
The judges highlighted that the PCMA, 2006, specifically allows child marriages to be declared voidable at the option of the minor party, but this provision was not invoked by the appellant in her original suit.
Case title: X vs Y
Citation: FIRST APPEAL No. 450 of 2014