SC Ruling Mandating Seven Steps Around Sacred Fire To Consider Hindu Marriage Valid Does Not Hold Water In State Due To Unique Amendment To Act In 1967 Eliminating This Requirement
K. Chandru
Formerly Judge of Madras High Court
Related articles
The recent Supreme Court ruling that a bride and groom must take seven steps together around the sacred fire for a Hindu marriage to be considered valid has sent shockwaves through society. It probably left many wondering whether they went through these ‘essential’ rituals before they got married and whether their marriage despite registration is valid.
The Supreme Court was considering a plea arguing that if essential rituals from the Sastras were not performed and if the couple did not walk seven steps together around the fire, the marriage should be declared invalid.
The court agreed with the contention and held that in the absence of such sastric requirements, a Hindu marriage notwithstanding its registration thereafter will be invalid.
People from different communities and areas celebrate marriages in their own way and no one ever thought there were essential requirements for such performances. That the absence of such rituals can even annul a marriage is worrisome.
At the time of guaranteed independence, an interim government was formed under the premiership of Jawaharlal Nehru, which was also mandated to evolve a new Constitution.
B R Ambedkar was inducted as Minister of Law in Nehru’s cabinet and entrusted with preparing a common Hindu Code.
The objective of the bill was to codify Hindu laws which are scattered and can be bewildering for the average person constantly leading to legal disputes. The bill sought to legalise monogamy, divorce for women, assign proper rights to women and confer equality to men and women in all legal matters.
Though the Congress party which was in majority in the House was in unison to fighting for political freedom, they did not do the same for social reform. Many Congress stalwarts including Rajendra Prasad, G.B. Pant and M.M. Malaviya joined Hindu Maha Sabha leaders in opposing the bill. Of the 26 Congress members who spoke during the debate, 23 were against it.
The bill that was sent to the select committee after a year had only four days of discussion in 10 months. In 1950, no time was allotted. In February 1951 being the last session of the House, clause-by-clause consideration was taken up for 3 days. Though the bill was put on the agenda on Sept 17, 1951, it was not taken up and died a natural death due to the ensuing elections and constitution of a new Parliament.
At that point, Ambedkar even decided to quit the cabinet, stating that “in regard to the bill” he had been made to go through the greatest mental torture”. He is quoted of saying, “The aid of party machinery was denied to me. The Prime Minister gave freedom of vote, an unusual thing in the history of the party… For days and hours filibustering has gone on a single clause…
I had never seen a case of chief whip so disloyal to the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister so loyal to a disloyal whip … The last time the bill was taken up in the party meeting only 20 of 120 were found to be against it. I was therefore quite unable to accept the Prime Minister’s decision to abandon the bill on grounds of time.”
After the 1952 general elections, the newly formed government re-inducted Ambedkar as a law minister and tasked with codifying the law relating to marriage succession and adoption for Hindus. This time four legislations were readied. The newly inducted members to Parliament passed the four legislations including the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Under Section 7 of the Act, the essential requirement of the marriage was for couples to take seven steps around the sacred fire. Therefore, what was believed to be the sastric requirement was now codified into law.
As a result of this requirement, even if the marriage is later registered, it will not be deemed valid since the essential sastric requirements were not met, thus rendering it invalid. Subsequently, litigations in courts have found many marriages invalid in the absence of the rituals. To overcome this, Tamil Nadu devised an alternative approach.
In 1967, when the DMK won the election defeating the Congress, C.N. Annadurai, its first Chief Minister, brought a state amendment to the Hindu Marriages Act.
Under the new section 7A, any marriage between two Hindus either called a self-respect marriage or reform marriage can be solemnised in the presence of any person and each party to the marriage should understand that they take the other to be their spouse if both garland or put a ring on each other or by tying a thali (mangalsutra). Given this amendment, the requirement of any sastric ritual was completely dispensed with. A challenge was dismissed, and the Supreme Court upheld the amendment (Nagalingam Vs. Shivgami, 2001).
Following the amendment, self-respect marriages became increasingly common in Tamil Nadu. Some enterprising lawyers began conducting such marriages in their offices. A complaint that reached Madras high court in 2014 found that 50 per cent of the marriages in North Chennai were performed at the offices of advocates. The division bench which heard the case warned lawyers that solemnising marriage is not their job and their offices are not marriage halls (S. Balakrishna Pandiyan, 2014).
When this matter was taken to the Supreme Court, it held that the view of the Madras high court was erroneous. It said the high court cannot put any conditions to encumscribe the width of Section 7A and that such a narrowing down is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution. The right of individuals to exercise free choice is an intrinsic part of Right to Life (Ilavarasan, 2023) it said.
In view of the above rulings, Tamil Nadu stands apart and has little to lose on the new dicta issued by the Supreme Court. No fire or seven steps are required to validate marriages in this state.
Courtesy: ‘The Times of India’
