Seven pheras enough for Hindu marriage, Kanyadan not essential : Allahabad High Court

Prayagraj (UP) – The Allahabad High Court has said in a landmark judgment that Kanyadan is not an essential ritual in Hindu marriage. According to the Court, the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 specifies only 7 pheras (rounds) as essential for Hindu marriage, with no explicit mention of Kanyadan. Kanyadan is not an essential condition of Hindu marriage.

1. Allahabad High Court’s Justice Subhash Vidyarthi said that according to the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, ‘7 pheras’ is considered as the only essential ceremony of marriage. Kanyadan is a traditional ritual in which the father gives his daughter away to the groom. This ritual symbolises the journey from paternal care to married life. Kanyadan may be an important ritual, but it is not essential for the validity of the marriage. This ritual can lead to discrimination against women. Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act states that a Hindu marriage may be solemnised in accordance with the customary rites and ceremonies of either party thereto. Where such rites and ceremonies include Saptapadi (walking seven steps together by the groom and the bride before the sacred fire), the marriage becomes complete and binding when the seventh step is taken.

2. The petitioner contended that discrepancies existed in the prior testimonies of witnesses concerning the 2015 marriage certificate, which was presented as evidence of the marriage ceremony. Given that Kanyadan holds pivotal significance in Hindu matrimonial customs, it is imperative to conduct a re-examination of two witnesses (a female and her father) to ascertain whether Kanyadan was indeed performed during the marriage proceedings.

3. The lower Court dismissed the petitioner’s plea, prompting him to file an appeal with the High Court. However, the High Court upheld the lower Court’s decision, asserting that the validity of a Hindu marriage does not hinge on the performance of Kanyadan. Consequently, whether Kanyadan was performed or not holds no essential bearing on the case’s adjudication, thus precluding the need to recall witnesses to establish this detail.

Editorial Perspective

There exist notable disparities between the rituals of Hindu Dharma and the provisions outlined in the Indian law. The legal framework of a secular nation tends to assign minimal significance to Hindu rituals. Hence, the emergence of such verdicts should not come as a surprise.