Void Marriages Under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: A Comprehensive Analysis

An Analysis of Void Marriages under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Introduction

The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter "HMA" or "the Act"), marked a significant step in codifying and reforming the law relating to marriage among Hindus in India. A cornerstone of this legislation is the concept of a valid marriage, defined by specific conditions, the breach of which can render a marriage either void or voidable. Section 11 of the HMA specifically addresses 'Void Marriages,' stipulating circumstances under which a marriage solemnized after the commencement of the Act is considered null and void ab initio. This article aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of Section 11, exploring its statutory contours, judicial interpretations, and its interplay with other provisions of the HMA and related laws. The discussion will delve into the conditions that lead to a marriage being declared void, the procedural aspects of seeking such a declaration, and the consequential legal implications, particularly concerning the status of parties, maintenance rights, and the legitimacy of children born of such unions, drawing upon key judicial pronouncements and statutory provisions.

Statutory Framework: Section 11 and Related Provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Section 11 of the HMA, titled "Void marriages," states:

"Any marriage solemnized after the commencement of this Act shall be null and void and may, on a petition presented by either party thereto against the other party, be so declared by a decree of nullity if it contravenes any one of the conditions specified in clauses (i), (iv) and (v) of Section 5."[11, 16]

For Section 11 to apply, two primary conditions must be met: first, the marriage must have been solemnized after the commencement of the HMA (i.e., on or after 18th May 1955)[20], and second, it must contravene one or more of the specific conditions laid down in Section 5(i), 5(iv), or 5(v) of the Act.

The relevant conditions in Section 5 are:[14]

  • Section 5(i): "neither party has a spouse living at the time of the marriage;" This provision mandates monogamy. A marriage in contravention of this condition is bigamous and therefore void.[6, 17]
  • Section 5(iv): "the parties are not within the degrees of prohibited relationship unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two;"
  • Section 5(v): "the parties are not sapindas of each other, unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two;"

It is crucial to distinguish void marriages under Section 11 from voidable marriages dealt with under Section 12 of the HMA. A void marriage is non-existent in law from its inception, whereas a voidable marriage remains valid until it is annulled by a decree of nullity by a competent court.[13, 17] Section 12 covers grounds such as non-consummation due to impotence, contravention of Section 5(ii) (mental capacity), consent obtained by force or fraud, or pre-marriage pregnancy by someone other than the petitioner.[12, 13] Contraventions of other conditions in Section 5, such as those relating to mental capacity (Section 5(ii)) or age (Section 5(iii)), do not render a marriage void under Section 11 but may make it voidable under Section 12 or attract penalties under other laws.[14, 16]

Furthermore, Section 17 of the HMA reinforces the prohibition against bigamy by stating that any marriage between two Hindus solemnized after the commencement of the Act is void if, at the date of such marriage, either party had a husband or wife living, and the provisions of Sections 494 and 495 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) shall apply accordingly.[10] This directly links a marriage void under Section 11 (due to contravention of Section 5(i)) to criminal consequences.

The HMA applies to "any two Hindus."[12] Consequently, a marriage solemnized under the HMA between a Hindu and a non-Hindu (e.g., a Christian) has been held to be a nullity, as the Act is intended to govern marriages exclusively between Hindus.[8] Such a marriage would be void for not meeting the fundamental requirement of Section 5 that it be "between any two Hindus," and thus, by extension, could be considered under the broad principles of nullity, even if not directly falling under the specific contraventions listed in Section 11 for Section 5(i), (iv), or (v).

Judicial Interpretation and Application of Section 11 HMA

Nature of Void Marriages

A marriage that is void under Section 11 is void ab initio, meaning it is considered never to have existed in the eyes of the law.[6] Such a marriage does not require a decree of nullity from a court to be considered void; its nullity is inherent.[17] However, Section 11 provides that a petition may be presented by "either party thereto against the other party" to have the marriage "so declared by a decree of nullity."[11, 18] This decree is essentially declaratory in nature, formally affirming the pre-existing void status of the marriage.[17]

Specific Grounds for Voidness under Section 11

1. Bigamy (Contravention of Section 5(i) HMA)

The most common ground for a marriage being declared void under Section 11 is bigamy – where one party has a spouse living at the time of the subsequent marriage. The Supreme Court has consistently held that a second marriage contracted during the subsistence of a valid first marriage is null and void.[6, 22] This principle applies even if a Hindu husband converts to Islam for the purported purpose of contracting a second marriage, as such a conversion does not dissolve the first Hindu marriage. The second marriage remains void under HMA and punishable under Section 494 IPC via Section 17 HMA.[2, 4] For Section 11 to apply, the allegedly void bigamous marriage must have been solemnized after the commencement of the HMA.[20] If a bigamous marriage was contracted before the HMA, its validity would be determined by the law then in force, though pre-existing laws in some regions also prohibited bigamy.[1, 23]

To establish bigamy, the subsistence of a valid first marriage at the time of the second marriage must be proven. This includes proving that the first marriage was solemnized in accordance with customary rites and ceremonies as required by Section 7 of the HMA.[15]

2. Prohibited Relationships (Contravention of Section 5(iv) HMA)

A marriage between parties who are within the "degrees of prohibited relationship" is void under Section 11, unless a valid custom or usage governing both parties permits such a marriage.[11] The degrees of prohibited relationship are defined in Section 3(g) of the HMA.

3. Sapinda Relationships (Contravention of Section 5(v) HMA)

Similarly, a marriage between parties who are "sapindas" of each other is void, unless permitted by a valid custom or usage governing both.[11] The definition of "sapinda relationship" is provided in Section 3(f) of the HMA.

Consequences of a Void Marriage under Section 11 HMA

Status of Parties

Since a void marriage is considered non-existent in law, it does not confer the legal status of husband and wife on the parties.[6, 17]

Maintenance

The status of the parties in a void marriage has significant implications for maintenance claims. The Supreme Court in Yamunabai Anantrao Adhav v. Anantrao Shivram Adhav held that a woman whose marriage is void under Section 11 HMA (due to the husband having a spouse living) cannot claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), as she does not meet the definition of "wife" under that provision.[6] This view has been echoed in earlier High Court decisions concerning the erstwhile Section 488 CrPC.[22]

However, a distinction arises under the HMA itself. Section 25 of the HMA allows a court exercising jurisdiction under the Act, "at the time of passing any decree or at any time subsequent thereto," to order permanent alimony and maintenance. The Supreme Court, in Rameshchandra Rampratapji Daga v. Rameshwari Rameshchandra Daga, interpreted "any decree" to include a decree of nullity passed under Section 11.[3] Thus, a woman whose marriage is declared void under Section 11 can be granted maintenance by the matrimonial court under Section 25 HMA, even though she may not be entitled to it under Section 125 CrPC. This interpretation aims to prevent destitution and provide financial support to the dependent spouse.[3, 24]

Legitimacy of Children (Section 16 HMA)

One of the most significant consequences of a void marriage relates to the children born of such a union. Section 16 of the HMA, particularly after its amendment by the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976, provides a crucial safeguard. Section 16(1) states:

"Notwithstanding that a marriage is null and void under Section 11, any child of such marriage who would have been legitimate if the marriage had been valid, shall be legitimate, whether such child is born before or after the commencement of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976, and whether or not a decree of nullity is granted in respect of that marriage under this Act and whether or not the marriage is held to be void otherwise than on a petition under this Act."[1]

This provision creates a legal fiction, conferring legitimacy upon children born of marriages declared void under Section 11 (or voidable under Section 12 and annulled).[1, 20] However, Section 16(3) clarifies the extent of their property rights:

"Nothing contained in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall be construed as conferring upon any child of a marriage which is null and void or which is annulled by a decree of nullity under Section 12, any rights in or to the property of any person, other than the parents, in any case where, but for the passing of this Act, such child would have been incapable of possessing or acquiring any such rights by reason of his not being the legitimate child of his parents."[1, 23]

Thus, while such children are legitimate, their inheritance rights are restricted to the property of their parents and do not extend to the property of other relatives as if they were born of a valid marriage.[1, 25] The Supreme Court in Parayankandiyal Eravath Kanapravan Kalliani Amma v. K. Devi affirmed that children born of a void second marriage (void due to bigamy) are deemed legitimate under Section 16 HMA and are entitled to inherit their father's properties.[1] It is important to note that Section 16 applies to children of marriages that are void under Section 11 HMA, meaning marriages solemnized *after* the commencement of the Act.[20, 26]

Criminal Liability for Bigamy (Section 17 HMA)

As mentioned earlier, if a marriage is void under Section 11 due to contravention of Section 5(i) (bigamy), Section 17 HMA is attracted. This provision makes the act of contracting such a marriage punishable under Sections 494 (Bigamy) and 495 (Same offence with concealment of former marriage from person with whom subsequent marriage is contracted) of the IPC.[2, 4] The prosecution for bigamy can be initiated based on a complaint by an "aggrieved person," which has been interpreted to include the second "wife" of the void marriage.[5]

Procedural Aspects and Related Issues

A petition for a decree of nullity under Section 11 must be presented to the court specified in Section 19 of the HMA, which generally refers to the district court within the local limits of whose ordinary original civil jurisdiction the marriage was solemnized, or the respondent resides, or the parties last resided together.[10]

The issue of compulsory registration of marriages, as mandated by the Supreme Court in Seema (Smt) v. Ashwani Kumar, while not directly a part of Section 11, plays a vital role in providing proof of marriage.[9] Such registration can be crucial in establishing the existence or non-existence of a prior marriage when a plea of bigamy under Section 5(i) read with Section 11 is raised.

The HMA also has an overriding effect as per Section 4. If a marriage was void under a pre-existing local law (e.g., Madras Hindu (Bigamy Prevention and Divorce) Act, 1949), the repeal of such an Act by the HMA does not validate that marriage. Its void status continues, and if solemnized after the HMA, its validity is tested under HMA provisions.[1, 23]

Discussion of Key Judicial Precedents

The interpretation of Section 11 HMA has been shaped by numerous judicial pronouncements. In Parayankandiyal Eravath Kanapravan Kalliani Amma (Smt) And Others v. K. Devi And Others[1], the Supreme Court extensively discussed the scope of Section 16 HMA, affirming the legitimacy and inheritance rights (to parents' property) of children born from marriages void due to bigamy, even if the marriage was void under a repealed prior Act and continued to be void post-HMA. The cases of Sarla Mudgal[2] and Lily Thomas[4] are landmark judgments establishing that a Hindu marriage remains subsisting despite one party's conversion to Islam to contract a second marriage, rendering the second marriage void under Section 11 (via Section 5(i)) and punishable under the IPC.

The dichotomy in maintenance provisions is highlighted by Yamunabai Anantrao Adhav[6] (denying maintenance under Section 125 CrPC to a 'wife' of a void marriage) and Rameshchandra Rampratapji Daga[3] (affirming maintenance under Section 25 HMA upon a decree of nullity under Section 11). This reflects a legislative and judicial intent to provide a social safety net under matrimonial law, even if general criminal procedure law does not recognize the 'wife' status in such cases.

Gullipilli Sowria Raj v. Bandaru Pavani[8] clarified that the HMA governs marriages "between two Hindus," and a marriage solemnized under HMA between a Hindu and a non-Hindu is a nullity. Lila Gupta v. Laxmi Narain[7] is pivotal in distinguishing that only contraventions of clauses (i), (iv), and (v) of Section 5 render a marriage void under Section 11, while violations of other clauses of Section 5 (like age or mental capacity, which are not listed in Section 11) do not automatically lead to voidness under this section, though they may have other consequences (e.g., voidability under Section 12).

Conclusion

Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, plays a crucial role in defining the boundaries of a legally valid Hindu marriage by specifying conditions that render a purported marriage null and void from its inception. It primarily targets bigamous unions and those within prohibited degrees of relationship or between sapindas, thereby upholding fundamental tenets of Hindu matrimonial law. While the declaration of a marriage as void has severe consequences for the parties, the legislature and the judiciary have sought to mitigate some of the harshness, particularly concerning the legitimacy and inheritance rights of children born of such unions (Section 16 HMA) and the provision for maintenance to a dependent spouse under Section 25 HMA. The consistent interpretation by Indian courts has reinforced the objectives of Section 11, ensuring clarity and striving for a balance between upholding legal principles and addressing the socio-economic realities arising from void matrimonial alliances.

References