The High Court of Delhi, in a significant judgment, has dismissed an appeal by a husband seeking to declare his marriage null and void on the grounds that the essential ceremony of Saptapadi was not performed. A Division Bench comprising Justice Anil Khetarpal and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar upheld a Family Court decision, ruling that a heavy burden of proof lies on the party challenging the marriage and that a strong presumption of a valid marriage arises when a couple has lived together and has had a child.
Case Background
The case concerns an appeal filed by a husband against a judgment dated 10.05.2023 by the Family Court, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. The husband had filed a suit to declare his marriage to the respondent-wife as null and void.
According to the pleadings, the parties exchanged garlands on 19.06.2016 in Delhi. The marriage was consummated, and a daughter was born from the union. The appellant-husband claimed that customary ceremonies, specifically Saptapadi (the taking of seven steps jointly before the sacred fire), were never performed. He stated that he lived with the respondent-wife until 11.10.2016. The respondent, however, claimed she was thrown out of the matrimonial home on 02.10.2017.
The learned Family Court, after appreciating the evidence, dismissed the husband’s suit, finding it to be without merit. Aggrieved by this decision, the husband filed the present appeal before the High Court.
Arguments of the Parties
The counsel for the appellant-husband contended that the respondent-wife had failed to produce the marriage album, and therefore, an adverse inference should be drawn against her. He argued that the wife failed to prove that Saptapadi was performed at their marriage.
Conversely, the counsel for the respondent-wife submitted that all ceremonies, including Saptapadi, were duly performed. It was argued that the burden lay upon the appellant to prove his claim that Saptapadi was not performed, an onus which he “miserably failed to discharge.” The existence of a daughter from the wedlock was also highlighted.
Court’s Analysis and Observations
The High Court, in its judgment, conducted a thorough analysis of the evidence and legal principles. The Court noted from the Family Court record that the appellant, who appeared as a witness, did not examine the priest, any guest, or any elderly person to substantiate his claim that Saptapadi was not performed.
The Bench examined Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA), which governs the ‘Ceremonies for a Hindu marriage’. The Court observed:
“Sub-section (1) of Section 7 confers discretion on the parties to solemnise marriage as per the customs and ceremonies of either party, without mandating any particular ceremony. Thus, performance of Saptapadi is not an indispensable requirement in every case to establish a valid marriage. Sub-section (2) only clarifies that where Saptapadi is a part of the customary rites performed, the marriage attains completeness and binding force with the seventh step.”
The Court agreed with the respondent’s counsel, stating that a “heavy burden lay on the Appellant to prove that the essential ceremony of Saptapadi was not performed.”
A crucial aspect of the Court’s reasoning was the legal presumption of a valid marriage. The judgment noted that in the facts of the case, “the presumption of a valid marriage comes into play, which further weakens the Appellant’s contention.” The Bench cited and relied upon the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Ningu Vithu Bamane v. Sadashiv Ningu Bamane [1986 SCC OnLine Bom 30], quoting it extensively. The key principle highlighted was:
“Thus when a man and a woman live together as husband and wife for sufficiently long time and were treated as husband and wife by friends, relatives and neighbours, there is always a presumption in favour of their marriage. If children are born to such a couple, there is a further presumption in favour of their legitimacy… The evidence for that should be strong, satisfactory and conclusive.”
Applying this principle, the Delhi High Court observed that the parties had admittedly resided together and had a child. The Court stated:
“When a child is born to such a couple, there arises a strong presumption that the marriage is legitimate. The presumption of a valid marriage is not diminished simply because there is no direct or positive proof of the ceremony of Saptapadi having taken place. On the contrary, if there is even some evidence showing that the parties went through a form of marriage, the presumption becomes stronger.”
The Court also dismissed the appellant’s argument regarding the marriage album, concluding:
“The burden of proof being on the Appellant to establish that no Saptapadi was performed, an adverse inference cannot be drawn against the Respondent for not producing the marriage album to demonstrate the ceremonies. Even assuming such an album were produced, it cannot conclusively establish whether Saptapadi was performed.”
Decision of the Court
Finding no reason to interfere with the Family Court’s decision, the High Court held that its conclusion was “plausible and possible.” The appeal was consequently dismissed, affirming the validity of the marriage between the parties.
