High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Divorce Cannot Be Granted Merely on WhatsApp Chats: Bombay High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Decree Based on Unproved Electronic Evidence State Cannot Demand Settlement Amount Yet Withhold Legitimate Refund: Bombay High Court Strikes Down MVAT Settlement Order Surveyor’s Report Is Not Sacrosanct; Arbitral Award Ignoring Vital Evidence Is Perverse: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Insurance Arbitration Award When Victim Lives Under Exclusive Control Of Accused, Burden Shifts To Accused To Explain What Happened: Calcutta High Court Medical Evidence Clearly Indicating Suicide Cannot Be Overlooked, Prosecution Must Prove Homicidal Death Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Andhra Pradesh High Court 'Candidates Acted With Full Knowledge of Consequences': Kerala High Court Reverses Order for Refund of 10% Exit Fee in Medical PG Mop-Up Admissions Dispensing with Departmental Inquiry Without Material is Arbitrary: Supreme Court Sets Aside Dismissal of Delhi Police Constable Power Of Attorney Holder Authorized To Enforce Pre-Emption Right Can File Suit, Death Of Principal Does Not Bar Legal Heirs: Orissa High Court Government Servant Convicted In Criminal Case Can Be Dismissed Without Departmental Enquiry: Tripura High Court Upholds Teacher’s Dismissal RTI Cannot Be Used To Bypass Statutory Bar On Police Case Diaries: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Penalty Against Police Officers Externment Cannot Be Based On Police Report And Stale Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes District Magistrate’s Order Even Exonerated Accused Can Be Summoned During Trial: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Summoning Under Section 358 BNSS Benefit of Doubt Acquittal Not Equal to Honourable Acquittal: Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Police Constable Candidate Madras High Court Allows NEET-Failed Student To Appear In CBSE Class XII Mathematics Exam After Last-Minute Subject Switch By Parents Salary of Parents Cannot Be Used to Deny OBC Non-Creamy Layer Status in Absence of Post Equivalence: Supreme Court Father Who Rapes Minor Daughter Cannot Seek Leniency: Bombay High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment Construction Of Toilet Is Bare Necessity For Proper Use Of Premises, Expression "Own Use" Not Confined To Landlord's Personal Physical Use: Calcutta High Court 353 IPC | Conviction Cannot Rest On Uncorroborated Testimony Of Sole Witness When Other Evidence Contradicts Occurrence: Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal 250 BNSS | 60-Day Discharge Period Is Procedural, Does Not Extinguish Accused's Right To Seek Discharge: Gujarat High Court Section 45 PMLA Cannot Become an Instrument of Endless Incarceration: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in ₹18 Crore Scholarship Scam Case Land Acquisition — Heirs Who Slept on Rights for 23 Years Cannot Claim Ignorance to Revive Dead Challenge: Karnataka High Court Institutional Hearing Is No Violation of Natural Justice: Kerala High Court Upholds BPCL’s Termination of Decades-Old Petroleum Dealership Witnesses Not Expected To Recount Past Incidents With Mathematical Precision, Minor Contradictions Don't Demolish Credibility: Orissa High Court If a Suit Is Ex Facie Barred by Limitation, the Court Has No Choice but to Dismiss It: P&H High Court

“Public Declaration Not Necessary for Valid Marriage”: Supreme Court Overrules Madras High Court’s Interpretation on Solemnization under Section 7A of Hindu Marriage Act

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India today delivered a landmark judgement, overruling the Madras High Court’s earlier decision that had made public declaration a necessity for solemnizing marriages under Section 7A of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, presiding over the case, stated that imposing a requirement for a public declaration “is not only narrowing the otherwise wide import of the statute but also would be violative of the rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”

The case came into the spotlight when Ilavarasan filed a habeas corpus petition, alleging that his wife Mathithra was forcibly married to her maternal uncle and was restrained against her will. The Supreme Court directed the District Legal Services Authority to record Mathithra’s statement, which corroborated Ilavarasan’s claim.

The apex court took issue with the Madras High Court’s reliance on a previous decision and clarified the Tamil Nadu Amendment Act’s provisions. The court stressed that Section 7A merely required the intending spouses to declare their willingness to marry each other, and no public ceremony was needed.

The judgement further emphasized that due to various societal pressures, many couples may not be able to make a public declaration. “Doing so would imperil their lives or could in the very least likely result in danger to their bodily integrity or at worst, a forcible or coerced separation of one from the other,” said the Court.

The Supreme Court also reasserted that free will and choice in marriage are intrinsic parts of the right to life, as mentioned in previous judgments such as Lata Singh v. State of UP and Shafin Jahan v. Asokan KM.

The Court’s decision has been seen as a significant step towards safeguarding individual liberties and is expected to have far-reaching implications in how the law is applied and interpreted regarding personal freedoms and marriage in the country.

Date of Decision: 28 August 2023

ILAVARASAN vs THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE & ORS.   

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/28-Aug-2023_ILLAVARSAN_Vs_State.pdf"]

Latest Legal News