Dolly Rani v. Manish Kumar Chanchal

Two commercial pilots got a marriage certificate and a State registration without performing any marriage ceremony. Later they fought, and each filed cases against the other. On their joint request under Article 142, the Supreme Court declared that they were never validly married. It also explained that registration under Section 8 of the Hindu Marriage Act does not create a marriage.

Quick Revision

Read the full judgment: Indian Kanoon (unofficial copy)

Parties

Dolly Rani (Doly Rani) — petitioner; the wife, a trained commercial pilot, residing in Ranchi, Jharkhand with her parents.

Manish Kumar Chanchal — respondent; the husband, a trained commercial pilot, who filed a divorce petition in Muzaffarpur, Bihar.

Vadik Jankalyan Samiti (Regd.) — the entity of Ghaziabad that issued a marriage certificate.

Registrar of Marriages / Marriage Registration Officer — issued a Certificate of Registration of Marriage under the Uttar Pradesh Marriage Registration Rules, 2017.

Procedural History

1. On 17 November 2022 the petitioner filed FIR No. 463/2022 at Police Station Sukhdev Nagar, Ranchi (Nagarathna, J.).
2. On 13 March 2023 the respondent filed a divorce petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the Family Court, Muzaffarpur, Bihar (Matrimonial Case No. 82/2023) (Nagarathna, J.).
3. The petitioner filed Transfer Petition (C) No. 2043 of 2023 under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to transfer that case to the Family Court, Ranchi (Nagarathna, J.).
4. During the petition, the parties filed a joint application under Article 142 of the Constitution (Nagarathna, J.).
5. The Court decided the application and disposed of the transfer petition on 19 April 2024 (Nagarathna, J.).

Facts

1. The petitioner and the respondent are trained commercial pilots. They were engaged to be married on 7 March 2021 (Nagarathna, J.).
2. They claimed to have solemnized their marriage on 7 July 2021. They obtained a marriage certificate from Vadik Jankalyan Samiti (Regd.). On that certificate, they obtained a Certificate of Registration of Marriage under the Uttar Pradesh Marriage Registration Rules, 2017 (Nagarathna, J.).
3. Their families fixed 25 October 2022 for the marriage ceremony as per Hindu rites and customs (Nagarathna, J.).
4. The parties lived separately, and differences arose. The petitioner said the respondent's family demanded dowry (Nagarathna, J.).
5. On 17 November 2022 the petitioner filed an FIR under Sections 498A, 420, 506, 509 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 against the respondent and his family members, alleging harassment (Nagarathna, J.).
6. On 13 March 2023 the respondent filed a divorce petition in Muzaffarpur. The petitioner, then living in Ranchi with her parents, filed the transfer petition (Nagarathna, J.).
7. The petitioner also filed Maintenance Case No. 326/2023 at Ranchi (Nagarathna, J.).
8. When queried by the Court, the parties said no marriage was solemnized, as no customs, rites and rituals were performed. Due to exigencies and pressures they obtained the certificate of 7 July 2021 from Vadik Jankalyan Samiti (Nagarathna, J.).
9. The Registrar of Marriages issued a Certificate of Marriage on 7 July 2021 on the basis of that certificate. They said they filed the joint application freely, without coercion or undue influence, and would abide by its terms (Nagarathna, J.).

Issues Raised

1. Was the marriage of 7 July 2021 a valid Hindu marriage under Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?
2. Does a certificate issued by an entity, and a registration under Section 8 and the Uttar Pradesh Marriage Registration Rules, 2017, confer marital status without ceremonies?
3. Should the Court grant the joint prayers under Article 142?

Arguments Contended

For the petitioner (wife):

• There was no marriage between the parties in the eyes of the law. So the respondent could not seek a decree of divorce.

For the respondent (husband):

• There was indeed no marriage in accordance with Section 7, since the requisites of a valid Hindu marriage on ceremonies were not complied with.
• Having no other recourse, he was constrained to file the divorce case, because the marriage was registered before the Registrar of Marriages.

Joint application under Article 142: the parties asked for four things.

• A declaration that the marriage of 7 July 2021 is not valid in law.
• A declaration that the certificate of 7 July 2021 under the Uttar Pradesh Registration Rules, 2017 and the certificate of 7 July 2021 by Vadik Jankalyan Samiti (Regd.) are null and void.
• Taking on record the terms of settlement in paragraph 5 of the application. The parties added that the certificates would pale into insignificance because there is no valid Hindu marriage.
• Any other order the Court deems fit. The petitioner also asked for quashing of her Maintenance Case No. 326/2023 and FIR No. 463/2022 and the proceedings against the respondent and his parents.

Court's Reasoning

The order is by B.V. Nagarathna, J. for the Bench of B.V. Nagarathna and Augustine George Masih, JJ. The order has no numbered paragraphs, so each step ends with the judge's name.

Nagarathna, J. (for the Bench)

The application and the terms of settlement

1. Noted: The transfer petition was filed under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 by the petitioner-wife. The parties then decided to resolve the dispute by a joint application under Article 142. (Nagarathna, J.)
2. Noted: The parties were present and identified by counsel. They said no marriage was solemnized and no rites were performed. They asked the Court to declare that no marriage took place so that they could lead independent lives. (Nagarathna, J.)
3. Held: The Court has perused the other terms of the joint application. It finds them lawful and sees no legal impediment to accepting them. Before granting the reliefs it makes certain observations. (Nagarathna, J.)

Section 7: ceremonies for a Hindu marriage

1. Noted: Section 7(1) says a Hindu marriage may be solemnized in accordance with the customary rites and ceremonies of either party. Section 7(2) says that where the rites include the Saptapadi, the marriage becomes complete and binding when the seventh step is taken. (Nagarathna, J.)
2. Held: The word solemnised means to perform the marriage with ceremonies in proper form. Unless a marriage is performed with appropriate ceremonies and in due form, it cannot be said to be solemnised. (Nagarathna, J.)
3. Held: The requisite ceremonies must follow the applicable customs or usage. Where saptapadi is adopted, the marriage is complete when the seventh step is taken. A marriage not performed with the applicable rites will not be construed as a Hindu marriage. (Nagarathna, J.)
4. Held: For a valid marriage under the Act, the requisite ceremonies must be performed, and there must be proof of their performance when a controversy arises. (Nagarathna, J.)
5. Held: Without such a ceremony there is no Hindu marriage under Section 7. A mere certificate by an entity, in the absence of the requisite ceremonies, neither confers marital status nor establishes a marriage under Hindu law. (Nagarathna, J.)
6. Held: The certificate of Vadik Jankalyan Samiti says the marriage was solemnised by Hindu Vedic rites and customs. It does not indicate which rites were performed or whether Section 7 was complied with. So it is not a certificate evidencing a Hindu marriage under Section 7. (Nagarathna, J.)
7. Held: In the absence of any ceremony, such a certificate could not have been issued. On its basis, the Marriage Registration Officer registered the marriage under Section 8 of the Act. His certificate records that the parties appeared on 7 July 2021 and declared that their marriage was solemnised that day at Vadik Jankalyan Samiti (Regd.), Ghaziabad. (Nagarathna, J.)

Section 8: registration of Hindu marriages

1. Noted: Section 8 lets the State Government make rules for entering the particulars of a Hindu marriage in a Hindu Marriage Register, to facilitate proof. It lets the State Government, if it considers it necessary or expedient, make entry compulsory. It punishes contravention of a rule with a fine up to twenty-five rupees. (Nagarathna, J.)
2. Noted: Rules made under Section 8 must be laid before the State Legislature as soon as may be. The register is open to inspection at all reasonable times and is admissible as evidence, and certified extracts are given on payment of a fee. Section 8(5) says the validity of any Hindu marriage is not affected by the omission to make the entry. (Nagarathna, J.)
3. Held: Under Section 8, two Hindus married under the Act may register their marriage, provided the requisite ceremonies were performed. Registration is possible only where the marriage was solemnised under Section 7. (Nagarathna, J.)
4. Held: The advantage of registration is that it facilitates proof of the marriage in a disputed case. But if there was no marriage in accordance with Section 7, registration does not confer legitimacy. (Nagarathna, J.)
5. Held: Even if the parties met the conditions for a valid marriage under Section 5, there is no Hindu marriage in law without solemnisation under Section 7. The Marriage Registration Officer cannot register such a marriage. (Nagarathna, J.)
6. Held: Registration under Section 8 only confirms that the parties underwent a valid ceremony under Section 7. A marriage certificate proves the validity of a Hindu marriage only when the marriage took place, and not where no ceremony was performed at all. (Nagarathna, J.)

Nature of Hindu marriage

1. Noted: A Hindu marriage is a sacrament with a sacred character. In the Rig Veda, after the seventh step the bridegroom says: "With seven steps we have become friends (sakha)". (Nagarathna, J.)
2. Noted: A wife is considered half of oneself (ardhangini), with an identity of her own and as a co-equal partner. There is nothing like a better-half in a marriage, and spouses are equal halves. In Hindu law marriage is a sacrament or samskara, the foundation for a new family. (Nagarathna, J.)
3. Noted: With the Act, monogamy is the only legally approved form of relationship between husband and wife. The Act discarded polyandry, polygamy and other relationships. Parliament intended one form of marriage, with varied rites and customs. (Nagarathna, J.)
4. Noted: The Act came into force on 18 May 1955, and it amended and codified the law on marriage among Hindus. It covers Lingayats, Brahmos, Aryasamajists, Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs, who may contract a valid Hindu marriage. (Nagarathna, J.)
5. Noted: Section 4 gives the Act overriding effect. Any text, rule, custom or usage of Hindu law in force before the Act ceases to have effect on matters it provides for. Any other inconsistent law also ceases to have effect. (Nagarathna, J.)

Status of husband and wife

1. Held: A union under the Act gives the parties the status of husband and wife in society. A man and woman cannot be treated as husband and wife unless the marriage is performed with proper and due ceremonies in the prescribed form. (Nagarathna, J.)
2. Held: Without solemnisation under the Act, a man and woman cannot acquire the status of husband and wife. The Court deprecates the practice of young men and women seeking that status without a valid ceremony, as in this case where the marriage was to take place later. (Nagarathna, J.)
3. Noted: Under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, a man and woman of any race, caste or creed can acquire the status of husband and wife. Under the Hindu Marriage Act, the couple must comply with Section 5 and also solemnise a marriage under Section 7. (Nagarathna, J.)
4. Held: "a certificate issued in that regard by any entity is of no legal consequence". A registration of a marriage that did not take place is not evidence of a Hindu marriage and does not confer the status of husband and wife. (Nagarathna, J.)

Registration before the ceremony

1. Noted: In recent years couples with a marriage planned for a future date register it under Section 8 for practical purposes, on a document said to prove solemnisation. Parents agree in order to apply for a visa to a foreign country, to save time, pending the ceremony. (Nagarathna, J.)
2. Held: Such registration does not confirm that the parties solemnised a Hindu marriage. "Such practices have to be deprecated". The Court asks what the consequence would be if no marriage is solemnised at a future date, what the status of the parties would then be, and whether they would be husband and wife in law and in society. (Nagarathna, J.)
3. Noted: A Hindu marriage is a samskara and sacrament and an institution of great value. Children of a valid Hindu marriage are legitimate and have full rights. The Court does not discuss the vulnerability of children born outside wedlock. (Nagarathna, J.)
4. Held: The Court urges young men and women to think deeply about the institution of marriage before entering it. A marriage is not an event for song and dance and wining and dining, or an occasion to demand and exchange dowry and gifts under pressure. (Nagarathna, J.)
5. Held: "A marriage is not a commercial transaction". It is a solemn foundational event that establishes a relationship of husband and wife for an evolving family, the basic unit of Indian society. (Nagarathna, J.)
6. Noted: A Hindu marriage facilitates procreation, consolidates the family and solidifies fraternity within communities. It gives a lifelong, dignity-affirming, equal, consensual and healthy union of two individuals. It is considered to confer salvation, citing William Harman. (Nagarathna, J.)
7. Held: The Act acknowledges the material and spiritual aspects of marriage. Besides registration to confer the status of a married couple and acknowledge rights in personam and in rem, a special place is given to rites and ceremonies. The conditions for solemnising a Hindu marriage should be followed assiduously, strictly and religiously. (Nagarathna, J.)
8. Held: Couples and priests should sincerely conduct and take part in the customary rites and ceremonies under Section 7. The promises and the oath to remain friends forever lay the foundation of a lifelong commitment. If this is adhered to, there would be far fewer marriage breakdowns. (Nagarathna, J.)

Declarations and disposal

1. Held: The parameters were not followed here. The Court declares that the marriage dated 7 July 2021 is not a Hindu marriage under Section 7. (Nagarathna, J.)
2. Held: The certificate of Vadik Jankalyan Samiti (Regd.) dated 7 July 2021 is null and void. The certificate under the Uttar Pradesh Registration Rules, 2017 dated 7 July 2021 is also null and void. (Nagarathna, J.)
3. Held: The petitioner and the respondent were not married under the Act, so "they have never acquired the status of husband and wife". (Nagarathna, J.)
4. Held: The three cases are quashed: the divorce petition, Matrimonial Case No. 82/2023 in Muzaffarpur; Maintenance Case No. 326/2023 at Ranchi; and FIR No. 463/2022 at Police Station Sukhdev Nagar, Ranchi with its proceedings against the respondent and his parents. (Nagarathna, J.)
5. Held: The application under Article 142 is allowed. The transfer petition and pending applications stand disposed of. (Nagarathna, J.)

Authorities

• No cases are cited in the order. The Court refers to the Rig Veda on saptapadi (Nagarathna, J.).
• Other sources: William Harman, The Hindu Marriage as Soteriological Event, International Journal of Sociology of the Family, vol. 17, no. 2, 1987, pp. 169-82 (footnote 1).
• Names as spelt in the source text: Doly Rani vs Manish Kumar Chanchal (the case title); Manish Kumar v/s Doly Singh (the divorce case title).

Provisions mentioned

• Section 7, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: ceremonies for a Hindu marriage; customary rites and Saptapadi.
• Section 8, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: registration of Hindu marriages to facilitate proof; validity is not affected by omission to make the entry.
• Section 4 and Section 5, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: overriding effect of the Act; conditions for a Hindu marriage.
• Section 13(1)(ia), Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: the provision under which the divorce petition was filed; the judgment does not state its text.
• Special Marriage Act, 1954: marriage of any man and woman irrespective of race, caste or creed.
• Section 25, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: the provision under which the transfer petition was filed.
• Article 142, Constitution: the provision under which the joint application was filed.
• Uttar Pradesh Marriage Registration Rules, 2017: rules under which the registration certificate was issued.
• Sections 498A, 420, 506, 509 and 34, Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 3 and 4, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961: the sections in the FIR of 17 November 2022.

Judgement

1. The marriage dated 7 July 2021 between the parties is declared not a Hindu marriage, having regard to Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
2. The certificate of Vadik Jankalyan Samiti (Regd.) dated 7 July 2021 is declared null and void.
3. The certificate under the Uttar Pradesh Registration Rules, 2017 dated 7 July 2021 is declared null and void.
4. It is declared that the parties were not married in accordance with the Act and have never acquired the status of husband and wife.
5. Matrimonial Case No. 82/2023 (Muzaffarpur), Maintenance Case No. 326/2023 (Ranchi) and FIR No. 463/2022 (Police Station Sukhdev Nagar, Ranchi), with its proceedings, are quashed.
6. The application under Article 142 is allowed. The transfer petition stands disposed of, and pending applications are disposed of.

Legal Principle / Ratio

A Hindu marriage is valid only if the ceremonies required by Section 7 are performed, and registration under Section 8 only helps prove a marriage that has taken place. A certificate or registration without a ceremony gives no marital status. In the Court's words, "a certificate issued in that regard by any entity is of no legal consequence".

Critical Analysis

Analysis based on the judgment text.

The order rests on the parties' joint statements. The Court queried the parties, who said no ceremony was performed. The order does not say the fact was tested by evidence.

The general observations go beyond the parties' request. The parties asked for a declaration and quashing. The Court also made observations on the nature of marriage and the practice of early registration. The order does not say which of these observations bind other cases.

Article 142 was used to quash three proceedings. It quashed a divorce petition, a maintenance case and an FIR under the joint application. The order does not record a reason for quashing the FIR beyond the parties' joint application.

Significance

• The Court held that a certificate or registration cannot create a Hindu marriage without the Section 7 ceremonies.
• It explained that Section 8 registration only facilitates proof of a marriage that took place.
• It deprecated the practice of registering a marriage before its ceremony, for example to apply for a visa.
• It stressed the sacramental character of a Hindu marriage.

Exam-Important Points

• Facts in one line: two pilots obtained a marriage certificate and registration without any ceremony. The Court declared they were never married.
• Rule: a Hindu marriage needs the ceremonies of Section 7. Where saptapadi is included, the marriage is complete at the seventh step.
• Rule: registration under Section 8 only facilitates proof, and the validity of a marriage does not depend on the entry (Section 8(5)).
• Trap: registering a marriage before the ceremony confers no status, and the Court deprecated it.
• Trap: the Special Marriage Act, 1954 is different. It applies to any man and woman irrespective of race, caste or creed.
• Directions: two certificates null and void, and three cases quashed under Article 142.

Prepared from the full text of the judgment. Paragraph numbers follow the official Supreme Court judgment text; law reports may number the same paragraph differently.