Solemnization of Marriage with Special Reference to Live-in Relationships
The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 deems shastric rites to be required for marriage to be solemnized.
Introduction
There is no explicit law in India that governs "live-in partnerships," nor are there any enactments that define the rights and duties of couples cohabiting in a live-in relationship. This article analyzes the practices required for the solemnization of a legitimate Hindu marriage under Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, as well as the legal status of live-in relationships in regard to the presumption of marriage under Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 - Hindu Marriage Ceremonies
A Hindu marriage can be performed in accordance with either party's traditional ceremonies and procedures.
Following the inclusion of saptpadi (the taking of seven steps by the bridegroom and bride together before the sacred fire) in such rites and ceremonies, the marriage becomes complete and binding when the seventh step is taken.
Wedding Ceremonies in accordance with Hindu Law
The performance of shastric rites is required for the solemnization of marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955. Section 7 of the Act includes two types of rituals and rites [1]: shastric ceremonies and rites prescribed by Hindu Law, and other ceremonies and rites.
Traditional ceremonies and customs predominate in the caste or group to which one or both of the parties (or both) belong.
Some of the most prominent shastric rites practiced and performed by Hindus are kanyadana (bride's gift), panigrahan, vivahahoma, and saptapadi. The most important and required rite for Hindus is the saptapadi ceremony, in which the husband walks with the bride for seven steps in a north-eastern direction while reciting sacred songs.
The sacred fire must be preceded by saptapadi, it has been determined. Mantra chanting, on the other hand, is not required for marital validity, and the performance of the ceremonies is sufficient for the solemnization of a Hindu marriage.
Learn more about:Acid Attacks And Related Laws In India
The Madras High Court declared in Deivani v. Chindavdram[2] that the two fundamental procedures for the solemnization of a Hindu marriage are kanyadaan or the girl's gift and the saptapadi, and that if the saptapadi is omitted and all other ceremonies are performed, the marriage is invalid. In Tarapada Jana v. Kumar Bhawani Giri[3], the Calcutta High Court declared that if Saptapadi is performed properly, objections that shlokas were not read will not invalidate the marriage.
Customary Ceremonies Required for a Legal Marriage
If each party has a customary ceremony that is followed and performed properly, it will serve to prove the marriage's validity under the law, according to Section 7 of the Act. To be approved, customary rituals and ceremonies must be demonstrated to have been practiced among members of the particular caste, group, or sub-caste since ancient times and to have been recognized as mandatory in nature over time (Rabindra Nath v. State) [4]. The recognized customary ceremony may be non-religious or basic in nature, and it may consist of simply one ceremony.
As a result, saptapadi is not a requirement for every Hindu marriage. Many Indian cultures have their own distinct traditional rites that have been validly recognized over time, some of which are listed below:
The bridegroom's smearing of vermilion on the bride's forehead is the only compulsory ceremony among the Santhals. [5 Among the Nayahans of South India, the only ritual necessary is the tying of a vadu veeta thali around the bride's neck. [6]
Buddhists do not require a ceremony; all that is required is mutual consent.
[7]
In the Karewa community of lower caste Hindus, no ceremony is required, and living together as husband and wife with the purpose to live as such is sufficient to constitute a duly solemnised marriage.
[8]
Consequences of Failure to Perform Required Rites and Ceremonies
The required ceremonies, whether Shastric or customary, must be done on the bride's or groom's side in order for a lawful marriage to be recognized under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. [9] In Banu Rao v. State of Maharashtra [10], the Supreme Court stated that the performance of certain rituals has been deemed vital for the prosecution of bigamy, and that prosecution for bigamy cannot succeed without such performance.
A physician was prosecuted with bigamy in A.N. Mukerji v. State (1969 AIR 489) when it was stated that he performed three marriage ceremonies on three distinct days. The first was the moon ceremony, the second was the exchange of garlands in Kali temple after going seven steps in imitation of saptapadi, and the third was performed in front of the Guru Grantha Sahib in imitation of the Sikh ceremonial because the woman was Sikh.
The court determined that staging false marriage ceremonies did not constitute lawful ceremonies, and thus the bigamy accusation was dropped. In numerous circumstances, it has been established that executing appropriate ceremonies is critical for the restitution of conjugal rites, and restitution of conjugal rites cannot be granted if no valid ceremony has been performed. [11]
Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872 and the Status of Live-in Relationships
There is no special law in India that governs live-in partnerships, nor are there any enactments that define the rights and obligations of couples cohabiting in a live-in relationship. Although the law is unclear on this point, courts have long recognized live-in partnerships. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act of 2005 was the first to legalize live-in relationships, protecting women who are not legally married but are in a relationship with a male individual.
A court may presume the existence of any truth that it believes is likely to have occurred, taking into account the natural flow of events, human behaviour, and public and private business in a relationship as to the facts of the case, according to Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act. As a result, there is a presumption of marriage where a man and a woman live together for an extended period of time. Unless the contrary is shown, a valid marriage by continuous cohabitation between the couples will be presumed unless independent evidence of marriage solemnization is produced.
In Madan Mohan Singh v. Rajni Kant [12], the Supreme Court declared that the law presumptively favors marriage over concubinage. A man and a woman who have lived together for a long time are believed to be married, according to the premise. It has also been stated that a long-term live-in relationship cannot simply be a walk-in/walk-out relationship, and that children produced from such unions are legally recognized.
It was established in Anandi v. Onkar [13] that if a community of neighbors treats a pair as husband and wife, they are regarded as married, and the burden of demonstrating that they were not formally married falls on the party claiming it.
In the landmark case of S.Khushboo v. Kanniammal, the Supreme Court broadened the horizons by holding that live-in relationships are protected by the right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, and that it is a permissible act of two majors living together that cannot be considered illegal or unlawful.
Conclusion
The significance and necessity of the rites in the correct solemnization of Hindu marriages cannot be overstated. The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 did a good job of catering to the demands of various Hindu communities by offering lawful and equal status to shastric as well as customary ceremonies specific to each community. Statutes have endeavored to recognize such partnerships in order to facilitate the execution of laws for the benefit of all, in response to changing demands of the times and social behaviors, such as live-in relationships.
Comments
Post a Comment