The Court noted that a traditional Hindu marriage is not a valid marriage without the completion of ‘Saptapadi’ and ‘Datta Homam.’
In a recent ruling, the Patna High Court nullified a marriage, citing the groom’s coercion at gunpoint and the omission of the Saptapadi (seven steps around a sacred fire) ceremony as key grounds. Justices PB Bajanthri and Arun Kumar Jha emphasized that, according to the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955, a Hindu marriage is considered incomplete without the participation of the bride and groom in the Saptapadi ritual.
“From bare perusal of the aforesaid provision (of the Hindu Marriage Act), it is obvious that when such rites and ceremonies including Saptapadi the marriage becomes complete and binding, when seventh step is taken. Conversely, if ‘saptapadi’ has not been completed, the marriage would not be considered to be complete and binding,” the Court said.
In this context, the High Court referred to a 2001 Supreme Court judgment that emphasized the essential nature of ‘Saptapadi’ and ‘Datta Homam’ (offering of ghee into a sacred fire) for the validity of a traditional Hindu marriage. The case in question involved an Army signalman who claimed he was coerced into a so-called “marriage” after his uncle was abducted during prayers at a Lakhisarai temple on June 30, 2013.
On that day, under the threat of a firearm, he was forced to apply vermilion (sindhoor/sindhur) on the bride’s forehead and participate in a “marriage” devoid of any customary rituals, as per the petitioner’s assertions. Despite his uncle’s efforts to file a police complaint, it is alleged that authorities refused to address the matter. Consequently, the petitioner pursued legal action by filing a criminal complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate’s court in Lakhisarai, Bihar.
Alongside the criminal complaint, the petitioner sought the annulment of the coerced marriage through a family court. However, his plea was dismissed on January 27, 2020, leading the petitioner to seek redress from the High Court.
On November 10, the High Court granted the petitioner’s plea, concluding that the marriage ceremony had been imposed on him. The bride contested the plea, asserting that it was a regular arranged marriage. Nevertheless, the Court found the marriage ceremony to be far from ordinary.
Several factors fueled the Court’s skepticism, including the revelation that the officiating Pandit (priest) lacked crucial knowledge, such as the location of the wedding. Additionally, the Court noted the absence of any relatives of the groom at the ceremony, except for his allegedly kidnapped uncle. Doubts were also cast on the photographs of the “purported marriage,” with the Court deeming them inadequately exhibited and admitted as evidence in the trial court.
“Moreover, the photographs on their own could not reveal anything,” the Court observed.
The High Court found the reasoning behind the family court’s dismissal of the petitioner’s plea to be flawed. Additionally, arguments asserting an unjustified delay in filing the petition were also dismissed by the High Court.
