The Supreme Court today refused to go into the issue of whether the Hindu Marriage Act is clear with respect to consent of parties to marriage..A petition regarding the same filed by a woman from Karnataka was heard by a Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, which afforded her interim protection, but refused to consider the question relating to consent under Hindu Marriage Act..Senior Advocate Indira Jaising appeared for the petitioner..The petitioner’s contention was that she had been married off by her parents against her wishes and without her consent. She had subsequently escaped to Delhi and approached the Court seeking protection..She had also assailed certain provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956..The Court, at the outset, made it clear that it won’t go into the question of law..Jaising then tried to persuade the Bench..“The real problem is that this marriage took place without her consent. There is lack of clarity in the statute with respect to that. There is no clear declaration that there should be valid consent”, submitted Jaising..“There is a provision which states marriage is null and void, if consent is obtained by fraud. This clearly shows consent is necessary for marriage”, Justice Chandrachud replied..“Your Lordships are absolutely right, provided Your Lordships interpret Section 5 to mean consent is necessary. It is not clearly stated. I want a declaration that without consent, marriage is null and void”, submitted Jaising..When the issue of ceremonies followed for solemnsiation of marriage was brought up, Jaising said,.“Ceremonies vary and it is not codified. Even we (lawyers) have been struggling with these provisions for many years.”.The Court, however, refused to go into the issue maintaining that the statute is clear with the regard to consent. However, it agreed to deal with the prayer for protection of the petitioner..It then asked Centre to ensure that the petitioner receives adequate protection, while also directing that copies of the petition be served on the Centre and State of Karnataka..The matter will now be heard on May 5.
The Supreme Court today refused to go into the issue of whether the Hindu Marriage Act is clear with respect to consent of parties to marriage..A petition regarding the same filed by a woman from Karnataka was heard by a Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, which afforded her interim protection, but refused to consider the question relating to consent under Hindu Marriage Act..Senior Advocate Indira Jaising appeared for the petitioner..The petitioner’s contention was that she had been married off by her parents against her wishes and without her consent. She had subsequently escaped to Delhi and approached the Court seeking protection..She had also assailed certain provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956..The Court, at the outset, made it clear that it won’t go into the question of law..Jaising then tried to persuade the Bench..“The real problem is that this marriage took place without her consent. There is lack of clarity in the statute with respect to that. There is no clear declaration that there should be valid consent”, submitted Jaising..“There is a provision which states marriage is null and void, if consent is obtained by fraud. This clearly shows consent is necessary for marriage”, Justice Chandrachud replied..“Your Lordships are absolutely right, provided Your Lordships interpret Section 5 to mean consent is necessary. It is not clearly stated. I want a declaration that without consent, marriage is null and void”, submitted Jaising..When the issue of ceremonies followed for solemnsiation of marriage was brought up, Jaising said,.“Ceremonies vary and it is not codified. Even we (lawyers) have been struggling with these provisions for many years.”.The Court, however, refused to go into the issue maintaining that the statute is clear with the regard to consent. However, it agreed to deal with the prayer for protection of the petitioner..It then asked Centre to ensure that the petitioner receives adequate protection, while also directing that copies of the petition be served on the Centre and State of Karnataka..The matter will now be heard on May 5.
