The Bombay High Court ruling on what constitutes a Hindu marriage is significant. A 38-year-old woman claimed that she was married to a 40-year-old man because she had a physical relationship with him for 18 months. She also claimed that the man had put sindoor on her forehead and tied a mangalsutra around her neck at a temple. The court ruled that these acts did not make them a married couple because nobody in the community accepted them as married. The relatives or friends of both had not known that they were in a married relationship, as they were not taken into confidence when the couple allegedly tied the nuptial knot.
Earlier, she had alleged that the man had sexual relations with her by making false promises of marriage. She withdrew the complaint only when he paid her `2 lakh to settle the complaint. This would certainly have influenced the single-member Bench while deciding the case. She could also not prove that they were in a live-in relationship as they had never lived together. The Supreme Court had once ruled that a couple in a live-in relationship for a long time could be treated as a married couple. In the instant case, she did not get this benefit.
The verdict is significant as some seem to believe that sindoor and mangalsutra alone are sufficient to prove a marriage. There are any number of films in which marriages are depicted as a secret act between two persons. Under the new ruling, a secret marriage has no validity. The community must know that a couple have married. Nowadays, marriages have to be registered whether they are performed in a temple or a church or at home within a certain period for the marriage to have legitimacy. A church certificate or temple certificate has no value on its own, unless it is accompanied by a certificate of registration. Since the law is applicable to all marriages, frauds in marriages are unlikely. Once a marriage is registered, it becomes a legal bond.