Case Title: Smriti Singh vs State
A single bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh of Allahabad High Court while allowing a petition to quash a case filed against a woman, ruled that under the Hindu Marriage Act, ‘Saptapadi’ ceremony (Saath Phere) is one of the essential ingredients to constitute a valid marriage.
“Where marriage is disputed, it is not enough to find that marriage took place leaving it to be presumed that rites and ceremonies necessary to constitute a legal marriage were performed. In absence of cogent evidence in this regard, it is difficult to hold that the ‘Saptapadi ceremony’ of the marriage as contended by the complainant was performed so as to constitute a valid marriage between the parties concerned”.
The background of the case
The couple got married in the year 2017 as per the Hindu rites and rituals. However, the marriage was not successful on the account of acrimonious relation and matrimonial disputes.
The wife lodged an FIR against her in-laws alleging dowry harassment.
In 2021, the husband initiated a complaint against his wife claiming that she had married another man before their divorce. After which wife moved to the High Court for the quashing of the same.
The bench noted that the husband had not submitted any proof of the ceremonies being completed for the alleged second marriage.
While quashing the case against the woman, the bench said that “The application of the complainant with same allegation of second marriage against the applicant no. 1 was also investigated by the police officials and the allegation was found false. So far as the second marriage of applicant no. 1 is concerned, it is well settled that the word ‘solemnize’ means, in connection with a marriage, ‘to celebrate the marriage with proper ceremonies and in due form’. Unless the marriage is celebrated or performed with proper ceremonies and due form, it cannot be said to be ‘solemnized’. If the marriage is not a valid marriage, according to the law applicable to the parties, it is not a marriage in the eyes of law. It is also well settled that to constitute an offence under Section 494 I.P.C., it is necessary that the second marriage should have been celebrated with proper ceremonies and in due form. The ‘Saptapadi’ ceremony under the Hindu Law is one of the essential ingredients to constitute a valid marriage but the said evidence is lacking in the present case. Even there is no averment with regard to ‘Saptapadi’ in the complaint as well as in the statements under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., hence, this Court is of the view that no prima-facie offence is made out against the applicants as the allegation of second marriage is a bald allegation without corroborative materials. So far as the alleged photograph is concerned, this Court is of the view that photograph is not sufficient to prove the factum of marriage, especially when the same are not proved on record in accordance with the Evidence Act. Where marriage is disputed, it is not enough to find that marriage took place leaving it to be presumed that rites and ceremonies necessary to constitute a legal marriage were performed. In absence of cogent evidence in this regard, it is difficult to hold that the ‘ Saptapadi ceremony’ of the marriage as contended by the complainant was performed so as to constitute a valid marriage between the parties concerned. As such on taking into consideration the contents of the complaint on it’s face value, the basic ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 494 read with section 109 of I.P.C. are lacking, hence, no offence is made out against the applicants”.
