Introduction
Enacted in 1955, the Hindu Marriage Act establishes the principal legal framework for marriages among Hindus in India, and it likewise applies to Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs. It establishes the criteria for a valid union, procedures for divorce, and distinguishes between void and voidable marriages. Section 11 specifically addresses void marriages—those that are invalid from the outset—and this article examines the conditions rendering a marriage void, its consequences, and key judicial rulings.
What Is a Void Marriage?
A marriage that does not meet certain fundamental requirements is considered void ab initio, or legally non-existent, from the time it is solemnised, according to Section 11 of the Act. Unlike voidable marriages under Section 12, which remain valid until annulled by a court, void marriages are intrinsically invalid. While no court decree is necessary to establish their nullity, parties often seek a declaration of nullity to resolve ancillary issues such as property rights or marital status.
According to Section 11, a marriage that is solemnised after the Act’s effective date is automatically void and may be ruled null upon petition if it does not meet any of the requirements outlined in Section 5’s clauses (i), (iv), or (v).
Grounds for Declaring a Marriage Void
Section 5 of the Act specifies the prerequisites for a legitimate Hindu marriage. A breach of any one of the following renders the marriage void under Section 11:
- Existing Marriage (Bigamy) – Section 5(i)
Neither party may have a living spouse at the time of the new marriage. Entering into a second marriage while the first spouse is still alive not only voids the subsequent union but also constitutes an offence under Sections 494 and 495 of the Indian Penal Code. In Shiromani Jain v. Dr Ashok Kumar Jain (2017), the Supreme Court reaffirmed that a second marriage under these circumstances is void. - Prohibited Degrees of Relationship – Section 5(iv)
The parties must not fall within the prohibited degrees of consanguinity defined in Section 3(g)—for example, direct ascendants or descendants, siblings, uncles/nieces—unless a customary rule permits such a union. In Kiran Kaur v. Jagir Singh Bamrah (2014), a marriage between an uncle and niece was struck down for violating these prohibitions. - Sapinda Relationship – Section 5(v)
A marriage is void if the parties are “sapindas” of one another—that is, related within three generations on the mother’s side or five generations on the father’s—unless local custom allows it. This restriction guards against close blood relationships, reflecting traditional Hindu norms.
| Ground | Section | Illustration |
| Bigamy | 5(i) | Second marriage while the first spouse is alive – Shiromani Jain v. Dr A. K. Jain |
| Prohibited Relationships | 5(iv) | Marriage within forbidden kinship – K. Kaur v. J. S. Bamrah |
| Sapinda Relationship | 5(v) | Union within sapinda degrees (unless custom permits) |
Legal Consequences of a Void Marriage
- No Marital Status: Parties in a void marriage never attain the legal status of husband or wife; thus, they have no marital rights or duties such as maintenance or succession.
- Decree Not Mandatory: Although the marriage is void from inception, a formal decree of nullity may be sought to clarify legal entitlements, particularly concerning property disputes.
- Children’s Legitimacy: Offspring of a void marriage are deemed legitimate under Section 16(1), ensuring their right to inherit, including from the father’s estate as clarified in Balkrishna Pandurang Halde v. Yeshodabai Balkrishna Halde (2018).
Key Judicial Decisions
- Shiromani Jain v. Dr Ashok Kumar Jain (2017): Held that a second marriage during the life of the first spouse is void, underscoring the Act’s bigamy prohibition.
- Kiran Kaur v. Jagir Singh Bamrah (2014): Invalidated a marriage between close relatives, reinforcing the prohibited-relationship rule.
- Balkrishna Pandurang Halde v. Yeshodabai Balkrishna Halde (2018): Affirmed that children born of void marriages maintain full inheritance rights.
These rulings illustrate the judiciary’s consistent application of Section 11 to uphold legal, social, and moral tenets.
Evolution and Amendments
Originally part of the Hindu Code Bills intended to modernise Hindu personal laws, the Act was amended in 1976 by the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act to guarantee legitimacy for children of void or voidable marriages. Later amendments—such as the 1999 removal of epilepsy as a ground for divorce—did not alter Section 11, reflecting legislators’ satisfaction with its original framework.
Social and Cultural Dimensions
Section 11 embodies society’s endorsement of monogamy and the prohibition of close-kin unions, reflecting both moral and genetic considerations. At the same time, it respects diversity by allowing customary exceptions, thereby balancing uniform legal standards with India’s rich tapestry of cultural practices.
Conclusion
By invalidating marriages that breach fundamental conditions, Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act ensures that matrimonial alliances adhere to essential legal, social, and ethical norms. Its clear stipulations on bigamy, prohibited kinship, and sapinda relations protect individual rights and public welfare alike, while judicial interpretations and legislative refinements have preserved its efficacy in contemporary India.
is this marriage is valid?