Sunday, December 22, 2024
HomeLawMerely applying sindoor doesn't mean marriage, 'saptapadi' important for union to be recognised under...

Merely applying sindoor doesn’t mean marriage, ‘saptapadi’ important for union to be recognised under Hindu law: Patna High Court on ‘pakadua byaah’ case

Ravi and his uncle went to a temple in Lakhisarai to offer prayers where they were abducted after which Ravi was pressured to "marry" later that day.

The Patna High Court has given a significant judgment regarding forced marriage in Bihar. It stated that the Hindu law does not recognise marriages in which vermillion (sindoor) is forcefully put on a female’s forehead or applied under coercion. The decision was pronounced by a division bench comprising Justices P B Bajanthri and Arun Kumar Jha.

The court declared that unless the act of Hindu marriage is consensual and includes the custom of ‘saptapadi’ which involves the bride and groom completing seven rounds around a sacred fire, the union is termed void.

The petitioner, Ravi Kant, who was a signalman in the Army at the time, was kidnapped in the Lakhisarai area of Bihar more than ten years ago. He was then intimidated to apply vermilion on the respondent bride’s forehead at gunpoint, the bench observed on 10th November when it annulled the “forced” wedlock.

The high court noted, “From bare perusal of the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, it is obvious that the marriage becomes complete and binding when the seventh step is taken (around the sacred fire by the bride and groom). Conversely, if ‘saptapadi’ has not been completed, the marriage would not be considered to be complete.”

On 30 June 2013, Ravi and his uncle went to a temple in Lakhisarai to offer prayers where they were abducted after which Ravi was pressured to “marry” later that day.

When Ravi’s uncle attempted to file a complaint with the district police, he was reportedly turned away. Ravi then went to the chief judicial magistrate’s court in Lakhisarai and filed a criminal complaint. On 27th January 2020, the family court denied his petition after he filed a request for the annulment of marriage.

The high court bench, which heard the case, pointed out that the family court’s conclusions were incorrect and expressed surprise that the respondent’s priest had no prior knowledge of ‘saptapadi’ and could not recall the location of the wedding ceremony.

Join OpIndia's official WhatsApp channel

  Support Us  

Whether NDTV or 'The Wire', they never have to worry about funds. In name of saving democracy, they get money from various sources. We need your support to fight them. Please contribute whatever you can afford

OpIndia Staff
OpIndia Staffhttps://www.opindia.com
Staff reporter at OpIndia

Related Articles

Trending now

- Advertisement -