Simplified Explanation of the Judgment
The Patna High Court has set aside a 2018 order by the Family Court, Sheikhpura, which had dismissed a plea seeking annulment of a marriage allegedly solemnized under coercion and involving minors. The appeal was filed under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, by the father and son (appellants), challenging the Family Court’s rejection of their petition under Section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
The appellants claimed that on 4th May 2013, the second appellant (the son) was kidnapped by the respondents while returning from his Class XI examination. He was then allegedly forced to marry respondent No. 3 at a temple in Nawada district. The marriage, they argued, was not only against his will but also in violation of statutory age requirements—making both parties minors at the time of the ceremony.
Supporting this claim, the appellants presented educational documents: the son’s matriculation certificate (Exhibit 6) showed his date of birth as 15th September 1997, and the girl’s school record (Exhibit 5) stated her date of birth as 8th February 2002. This meant the groom was below 21 and the bride below 18 at the time of marriage, which contravenes Section 5(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
The appellants also filed an FIR (Barbigha PS Case No. 93 of 2013) immediately after the incident, on 5th May 2013, and the boy’s statement was recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC the following day, reinforcing the kidnapping and forced marriage allegations.
Despite this evidence, the Family Court rejected the annulment plea, partly relying on community customs, and did not give due weight to the school documents or FIR. The High Court noted that the respondents had not produced any evidence disproving the appellant’s age claim or to counter the kidnapping narrative. The court criticized the Family Court’s dismissal as being contrary to statutory law, especially since the law prioritizes legal provisions over community customs.
The High Court has now remanded the matter back to the Family Court for a fresh hearing, with specific instructions to consider the legal age of the parties, the FIR, and the boy’s recorded statement under Section 164 CrPC. The Family Court has been directed to decide the matter within three months.
Significance or Implication of the Judgment
This decision underscores the judiciary’s commitment to protecting minors from forced or unlawful marriages. It reinforces the binding nature of statutory requirements under the Hindu Marriage Act over social or customary practices. The judgment highlights that legal age and valid consent are essential components of marriage and that any deviation, especially involving coercion or fraud, cannot be overlooked.
It also reassures victims and their families that the legal system will consider documented evidence, like educational records and FIRs, seriously—even if the initial trial court fails to do so. For the government and law enforcement, this case signals the need for swift and sensitive handling of such matrimonial cases, especially when minors and criminal allegations like abduction are involved.
Legal Issue(s) Decided and the Court’s Decision
- Whether the marriage was voidable due to coercion and lack of valid consent?
- Court: Yes, it must be reconsidered under Section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
- Were the bride and groom legally competent to marry as per age?
- Court: No, both were minors under Section 5(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
- Did the Family Court err in ignoring statutory documents like school certificates?
- Court: Yes, statutory documents are primary evidence and should have been relied upon.
- Should the matter be reheard?
- Court: Yes, it is remanded to the Family Court for reconsideration.
Judgments Relied Upon or Cited by Court
- Sections 5 and 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (statutory reference)
Case Title
Miscellaneous Appeal No.733 of 2018
Case Number
Miscellaneous Appeal No.733 of 2018
Citation(s)– 2025 (1) PLJR 47
Coram and Names of Judges
Hon’ble Mr. Justice P. B. Bajanthri
Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. B. Pd. Singh
Names of Advocates and who they appeared for
Mr. Rajesh Ranjan – For the Appellants
None appeared for the Respondents
Link to Judgment
MiM3MzMjMjAxOCMxI04=-Ynsyv9Nnmo0=
If you found this explanation helpful and wish to stay informed about how legal developments may affect your rights in Bihar, you may consider following Samvida Law Associates for more updates.
