NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to initiate a debate on how a Hindu woman should express her consent for marriage, and maintained that the Hindu Marriage Act was clear that consent obtained by fraudulent means would serve as grounds for the marriage to be annulled.
Asking the Centre to grant protection to a 26-year-old from Karnataka who alleged she was forcibly married by her family, a bench led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra said: “There is neither a need nor an occasion to interpret the provisions for issuing a declaration to clarify the law.”
The court was informed that the woman’s wedding was performed without her consent in Gulbarga, Karnataka, on March 14. After spending just three days at her matrimonial home, she fled to Delhi and approached the court for protection.
Representing the woman, senior advocate Indira Jaising questioned the validity of the provisions in the Act, which consider only insanity and unsoundness of mind as grounds to nullify valid consent.
Jaising argued for more clarity in the Act, saying the court should issue a declaration that consent for a marriage would mean no consent unless it is free and valid consent, expressed explicitly by a woman at the time of her wedding.
Jaising pointed out that even prior to the woman’s wedding, her family and the bridegroom were informed that she was not consenting to the marriage.
On the day of the wedding, the woman informed the police but was threatened by relatives not to oppose the marriage.