INTRODUCTION
In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court provided clarity on the presumption of a valid marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Court observed that merely lacking direct or conclusive evidence of the Saptapadi ritual—the seven circumambulations around the sacred fire—does not by itself negate the presumption of a legally valid marriage. This ruling strengthens the legal understanding that marriages under Hindu law cannot be invalidated merely on technical grounds when there is sufficient circumstantial evidence indicating the performance of a marriage ceremony.
Presumption of Marriage under Hindu Law
According to Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, a Hindu marriage attains validity when it is solemnized following the customary rites and rituals of either spouse. Section 7(2) further provides that where Saptapadi is included in the ceremonies, the marriage becomes complete and binding upon the taking of the seventh step by the bride and groom jointly before the sacred fire. However, in many disputes, courts are called upon to determine whether the ceremonies were indeed completed in accordance with law.
The issue often arises when one party contests the validity of the marriage, claiming absence of essential rituals. In such cases, courts rely on the doctrine of “presumption of marriage.” Under this principle, if it is shown that parties lived together as husband and wife and went Once a marriage ceremony has been performed in some form, the law assumes the marriage to be valid unless it is definitively disproved.
The Court’s Observations
In the present matter, a division bench of the Delhi High Court observed that courts should not be hyper-technical in requiring rigid proof of every ritual. The judges clarified that if some evidence exists showing that a marriage ceremony in fact took place—even if there is no direct testimony about the exact performance of Saptapadi—the presumption of a lawful marriage is strengthened.
The Court drew attention to Section 7(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act which recognizes Saptapadi as an important ritual where it is part of community or family custom. However, the Court noted that absence of direct witnesses or photographic evidence of the ritual does not automatically invalidate the marital relationship. What matters is whether there is believable evidence that the parties went through a form of marriage in accordance with customary practices.
Wider Implications of the Ruling-
This interpretation carries immense relevance in resolving matrimonial, succession, and property disputes. Many marriages in India take place privately, without extensive documentation or record keeping. If courts were to insist on direct proof of every ceremonial step, a large number of long-standing marriages could be rendered doubtful. This would not only jeopardize spousal rights but also affect the rights of children, inheritance, and family property claims.
The High Court’s approach safeguards the sanctity and stability of marital relationships by ensuring that technical omissions do not unfairly delegitimize genuine marriages. By reinforcing the presumption of marriage where circumstantial evidence exists, the judgment also upholds the principle of social legitimacy and protects the interests of family members.
Conclusion
The Delhi High Court’s ruling reaffirms that Hindu marriage is not a ritualistic formality subject to rigid technical scrutiny, but a social institution grounded in custom and credibility. The Court correctly observed that merely lacking direct evidence of Saptapadi does not invalidate a marriage, provided there is proof of the ceremonial union. This decision strengthens the presumption of marriage under Hindu law and ensures continuity of rights and protections for spouses and children, thereby fostering justice and stability in matrimonial disputes.
