Supreme Court Judgement _hindu Marriages

A Hindu marriage is a ‘samskara’ or sacrament and cannot be recognised under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 “unless performed with ceremonies in the proper form”, the Supreme Court has ruled.

Underlining that a Hindu marriage “is a sacrament which has to be accorded its status as an institution of great value in Indian society”, a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Augustine George Masih in an order dated April 19 urged “young men and women to think deeply about the institution of marriage even before they enter upon it and as to how sacred the said institution is, in Indian society”.


A Hindu marriage facilitates procreation, consolidates the unit of family and solidifies the spirit of fraternity within various communities . It is considered to be an event that confers salvation upon the individual especially when the rites and ceremonies are conducted."
The bench said that “unless and until the marriage is performed with appropriate ceremonies and in due form, it cannot be said to be ‘solemnised’ as per Section 7(1) of the Act”.
It pointed out that “further, sub-section (2) of Section 7 states that where such rites and ceremonies include the saptapadi, i.e., the taking of seven steps by the bridegroom and the bride jointly before the sacred fire, the marriage becomes complete and binding when the seventh step is taken. The marriage becomes complete and binding when the seventh step is taken”.
THE MARRIAGE WILL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS A HINDU MARRIAGE. IN OTHER WORDS, FOR A VALID MARRIAGE UNDER THE ACT, THE REQUISITE CEREMONIES HAVE TO BE PERFORMED AND THERE MUST BE PROOF OF PERFORMANCE OF THE SAID CEREMONY WHEN AN ISSUE/CONTROVERSY ARISES”.

• When we fill in the form for registration,there is a clause that the marriage has been conducted
  thro valid ceremony and the form should be signed by the bride,bridegroom ,the parents of both and the
  priest who conducted the marriage.
  I think suya mariyaathai marriages are also registered by giving a false declaration by one and all.
  Or they would have performed the marriage in a valid ceremony secretly and for advertisement sake
  organize a big meeting canvassing suya mariyathai marriage.
  
  
• According to the analysis done by (Advocate New Delhi) on the cnbc portal, the Supreme Court in its recent judgment has taken into account Section 7A of the HMAct and then pronounced that unless the ritual prescribed is conducted the marriage cannot be valid. The position is therefore clear. The latest judgement is to be taken as overriding all previous views of courts in the matter.
  
  Although section 7A of the Hindu Marriage Act was enacted specially to legalize the suyamariadai marriages, one has to consider the entire issue in the light of the recent pronouncement of the Supreme Court that no hindu marriage will be valid unless the prescribed ceremonies were performed. Does this judgement then constitute a contradiction of Section 7A of the Hindu Marriage Act? In the light of the latest judgement, what is the impact on section 7A ibid?
  
  Section 7-A of The Hindu Marriage Act will apply to those marriages where the parties to the marriage, i.e., bride and bridegroom, solemnise a marriage only in the presence of parents, family, and friends. ( and NOT A PRIEST )
  
  The suya mariyaadai marriage is a deliberate attempt made by the ill advised dravidian parties, specially DK and DMK, with a view to spiting the Hindus and Hindu Dharma. There is no "suya mariyaadai" in such marriages, rather there is ample "apa mariyaadai" of Hindus and their traditional customs and culture. Recognition to such marriages might have been given in law taking into account the possibility of forced conversion to other beliefs by those whose wishes were not respected and recognized.
• I think that this judgment is a slap on the face of those followers of DK, DMK and EVR who have a tendency to ridicule Hindu marriages conducted in the vedic manner.
• But all these factors would havebeen known to people in the realm in 1968 also.Yes it is a great disgrace to pundits We belonging to middle class didn't care for it But even the pundits didn't seem to have taken it seriously because suya mariyathai vivaahams didn't t become so popular as expected.Only loud advts and publications remained.
• Two years back there was a meeting organized by DK on Tamil New Year day in which many ladies participated, removed mangala sutras on the stage .made a loud speech about the slavery behind tying of thaalis in the stage( to be worn again after going home)
• I wonder how in 1968 they formulated such a law to be used as an advt for political issues.Now even if Sec 7 A is invalidated there will be a hue and cry That is all .Culture cannot be changed that easily

JAYASALA 42

 

So many issues arise at this point.While it is the responsibility of the individuals concerned to ensure that the marriage is conducted as per prescribed norms,equal responsibility falls on Registration dept also.Money can speak a lot and fake marriages can be registered.

Sec 7 A is an altogether different category. Suyamariyaathai weddings take place in Tamilnadu in which no priest is needed,no thali is needed.It is a declaration by the individuals in the presence of friends and relatives.

There are hundreds of customs but sapthapadhi mantra is the same.

I am reminded of the wedding of my niece in 1996. The girl was iyer.'
The boy was from a salem gounder family..the couples were doctorates from Canada.
Wedding took place at the bride grooms residence in Rasipuram.
As was my habit, I had a keen observstion of the happenings.


The customs were strange.
Agni was a fatty Deepam in a big muddy pot full of ghee and the wick was a two metre cloth folded into
a wick dipped in ghee. That was glowing for nearly 24 hrs
continuously upto next day.

Another strange thing was there was no MALE Sastriji.There were six
ladies in traditional cotton sarees.The leader started the song and the rest followed.It was in classic Thamizh.
All the Sapthapadhi mantras were literal tranlation of the same in Sanskrrit.Gothra pravaranam also was loudly chanted in SENTHAMIZH.
The tune was in some PANN in THAMIZH. but was sweet to listen.
After the wedding I saw the book. it was both in SAnskrit and Tamil..

Fortunately suyamariyaathai weddings are only theoretically and politically popular.Many weddings in the houses of political leaders are conducted as per norms in wedding halls. Later for advt they conduct suya mariyaathai function in a meeting for advt sake.

We know the politicians. A few years back,on a Tamil new year day,many women clad in black removed the mangala soothra on the stage, raised a hue and cry that thaali is a symbol of slavery.Soon after the meeting everyone started wearing thaali again.

jayasala 42

 

Times of India today has published an article by the famous Chandru that suyamariyathai marriages without Sastri and Thali will not be covered under the presemt Supreme court judgement,If the sapthapadi is not prescribed for the wedding.,and it will not be considered a Hindu wedding.
As shri Viswa has said now there are two or three clear paths to get wedlock.You can categorically choose one and continue till registration.I think now the registrar has to be more careful with the scheme and documents thereof.Many weddings take place with the same rituals without reciting mantras in Sanskrit or any local language. There are hundreds of customs connected and not connected to sapthapadhi.Better Supreme court, if they want the judgement to be strictly followed,may issue very clear instructions about the Sapthapadhi procedures and about different varieties it may be handled to suit the law map.
So long, wedding registration was not a problem at all with exchange of cash. IN our house all registration was done officially in the wedding Hall. Now that registrar is into the law net ,he has to be all the more careful.He has to ensure the genuineness of the wedding rituals.If it becpmes complicated many couples would dare to declare the wedding under sec 7 A as " SUYAMARIYAATHAI WEDDING" just to escape from clutches of LAW.

Jayasala 42