Relationship Between Sections 5, 11, 12, 17, and 18 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
0
9
0
Written by – Khushi Jain
Introduction
In ancient times, Hindu marriages were considered sacred, spiritual unions meant to last a lifetime—often believed to continue even beyond death. Based on Smriti literature, there was no concept of a void or voidable marriage. However, with the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the legal landscape changed. The Act introduced clear statutory conditions for a valid Hindu marriage, and non-compliance could render a marriage either void or voidable.
This article analyses Section 5, which outlines the essential conditions for a valid Hindu marriage, in relation to Sections 11, 12, 17, and 18, which deal with invalidity, annulment, punishment for bigamy, and other penalties.
Essential Conditions for a Valid Marriage (Section 5)
Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 prescribes the following conditions:
Monogamy – Neither party should have a living spouse at the time of marriage.
Soundness of Mind – Both parties must be capable of giving valid consent.
Minimum Age – Groom must be 21 and bride 18 years old.
Not within Prohibited Degrees – Unless permitted by custom.
Not Sapindas – Again, unless permitted by custom.
Ceremonial Requirements – Must be solemnized through appropriate Hindu rituals, e.g., Saptapadi (seven steps).
Case Law:Bhawrao Shankar Lokhande v. State of Maharashtra (1965)
Held that a marriage is not valid under Hindu law unless solemnized in accordance with essential Hindu rites.
Void Marriages (Section 11)
A marriage is void ab initio (invalid from the beginning) if:
Either party has a spouse living at the time of marriage (contravenes Section 5(i)).
Parties are within prohibited degrees of relationship (contravenes Section 5(iv)).
Parties are sapindas of each other (contravenes Section 5(v)).
Legal Effect: Such marriages have no legal existence and can be declared null by a decree of nullity.
Case Law:M.M. Malhotra v. Union of India
Affirmed that void marriages are ipso jure invalid.Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India & Lily Thomas v. Union of IndiaHeld that a Hindu husband cannot convert to Islam to remarry without dissolving the first marriage—doing so amounts to bigamy under Section 494 IPC.
Voidable Marriages (Section 12)
A marriage may be declared voidable and annulled by court if:
It has not been consummated due to impotence of either party.
Consent was obtained by force or fraud.
A party was of unsound mind or incapable of understanding the nature of marriage.
The wife was pregnant by another person at the time of marriage, unknown to the husband.
Such marriages are considered valid until annulled by a competent court.
Case Law:
Jyotsnaben v. Pravin Chandra: Marriage annulled due to non-consummation.
Gursharn Singh v. Surjit Kaur: Court annulled a marriage forced upon a minor boy.
Shatrughan Chauhan v. Union of India: Addressed the rights of pregnant women in sentencing—indirect relevance to reproductive status in matrimonial contexts.
Bigamy and Its Punishment (Section 17)
Section 17 reaffirms that bigamous marriages are void under Section 11 and prescribes penalties under the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
Section 494 IPC: Punishment for bigamy – up to 7 years imprisonment + fine.
Section 495 IPC: Bigamy with concealment – up to 10 years imprisonment + fine.
Exceptions:
The earlier marriage is legally dissolved.
Spouse has been missing for 7 years, and this was disclosed to the new partner.
Case Law:Priya Bala Ghosh v. Suresh Chandra Ghosh (1971)
Discussed the evidentiary requirements to prove bigamy, emphasizing the need for strict proof of second marriage.
Penalties for Breach of Conditions (Section 18)
Section 18 imposes penalties for violating Section 5, particularly:
Child Marriage:
Marriage of boy under 21 or girl under 18 years.
Punishable with rigorous imprisonment up to 2 years, or fine up to ₹1,00,000, or both.
Marriage within prohibited degree or sapinda relationship:
Without valid custom permitting it.
Punishable with imprisonment up to 1 month, or fine up to ₹1,000, or both.
These provisions serve to uphold the ethical and structural integrity of Hindu marriages.
Conclusion
The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 represents a significant legal evolution by codifying essential matrimonial standards. It criminalizes bigamy and polygamy, protects individual rights, and ensures that Hindu marriages conform to age, mental capacity, and relationship norms.
Judgments like Sarla Mudgal, Lily Thomas, and Priya Bala Ghosh reinforce these principles and reflect the judiciary’s role in upholding monogamy and fair matrimonial practices. The prohibition of sapinda and prohibited relationships, and age conditions, ensure public health and social order.
Understanding the interconnected nature of Sections 5, 11, 12, 17, and 18 is crucial for lawyers, judges, and society to effectively assess the validity and consequences of Hindu marriages, and to safeguard the rights of all parties involved.
