Ceremonies & Customary Ceremonies of Hindu

Marriage
Ceremonies are an integral part of and very essential for a Hindu marriage to be
considered valid as per the Act. Performance of Saptapadi and its completion after
panigrahana is essential for a valid Hindu marriage. All other Shastric ceremonies are
optional and may or may not be performed to validate a Hindu marriage.
The Act that governs Hindu marriages is the Hindu Marriage Act 1955.
A number of Shastric ceremonies are recognized and these include:
Kanyadana:- The bride is given away to the bridegrrom. The father of bride says My
unmarried daughter who is shining in her decorations and who is fit to be devoted wife,
to thee of good character and wisdom I give for the attainment of Dharma, Artha, Kama
and Moksha.
Saptapadi:- Seven steps are taken around the sacred fire, the bridegroom says
Become thou now my partner, as thou hast places, all the seven steps.Aye! Partners
have we become as we have together and we shall reside together; we each shall be
source of joy unto the other; with mutual goodwill shall we live together.
Vivaha homa or Laja Homa:- The mantras of laja homa or vivaha homa pray for long
life, vigour and prosperity.
In Apibai Vs. Khimji 1937 Bom 138
it was held that vivaha homa is necessary but presence of priest is not necessary,
chanting of mantras also not necessary.
In Modi vs modi 1975 Cr LJ 208
held that vivaha homa is an essential ceremony.
Madras High Court after examining texts came to the conclusion that there are
two essential ceremonies necessary for the performance of Hindu Marriage. One
is Secular Ceremony Kanyadanam and the other is Religious Ceremony
Panigrahana and Saptapadi.
In Sudras Vivaha homa is not necessary ceremony and saptapadi is compulsory
if it is omitted and all other ceremonies are performed still marriage is invalid.
In Arya Samajists saptapadi is a necessary ceremony

Customary Ceremonies:- If customary ceremony is prevalent on the side of either

party, its performance will be enough for the validity of the marriage.
For such validity they must show and prove custom which must be ancient,
continues, according to public policy, etc. Several customary ceremonies are recognised

like South India Tying of thalli into the neck of bride with three knots itself is sufficient to
validate marriage. Among Santhals smearing of vermillon by bridegroom on the
forehead of bride is only essential ceremony. Like Chadar Andazi among Jats, Buddist
only mutual consent, Sikhs Anand Karaz form of marriage makes marriage validate.
Likewise every marriage must solemnize either by sastric form or in substitution of it in
customary form of either the parties to the marriage otherwise is invalid.
Section 7 :
1) A Hindu marriage may be solemnized in accordance with the customary rites and
ceremonies of either thereto.
2) Where such rites & ceremonies include Saptapadi (i.e. taking 7 steps by the
bridegroom and the bride jointly before sacred fire). The marriage becomes complete
and binding when the seventh step is taken.
By this section it is clear that every marriage must be solemnized as per
ceremonies. Such ceremonies may be customary or shastric ceremony atleast they
must observe saptapadi. By various court decisions
Effect of non-performance of necessary ceremony
Necessary ceremonies either shastric or customary which ever are prevalent on
the side of bride or bridegroom must be performed otherwise marriage will be invalid.
Ex: If bride is a Jain and bridegroom is Sikh then marriage must be solemnized either
saptapadi (Jain ceremony) or Anand Karaz (Sikh ceremony) must be performed
otherwise marriage is not valid. Performance of necessary ceremonies is a vital question
in cases of bigamy.
In Dr. N.A, Mukerji Vs. State
(AIR 1969 All 489)
where Dr. Mukerji was prosecuted for bigamy. It was alleged that 3 ceremonies of
marriage at three different times were performed.
1) Oath taking infront of moon.
2) Exchange of garlands in Kali Temple after walking seven steps an imitation of
saptapadi.
3) Ceremony performed before the Guru Granth Sahib an imitation of Sikh ceremony as
girl was Sikh. Court held that performance of mock ceremonies does not constitute valid
marriage hence prosecution for bigamy failed.
Deivain Achi Vs. Chidambara Chettiar ( AIR 1954 Mad.65)
The parties belonged to an Anti-Purohit Association of Self Respectors.
They opposed to having priest officiating at marriages. Therefore, according to the
practice of that association in the presence of their friends and invitees exchanged
garlands.
It was contended that this was sufficient for a valid marriage. The contention was
rejected and held that the customary ceremonies can not be altered except by legislation
such as the Special Marriage Act. The alteration cannot be made by a society or
association of recent date. So it was held that marriage was null and void.

So by mere non observance of proper ceremonies marriage can held invalid. Neither
the parties can claim any kind of rights over others.
So many innovations had been approved by the courts in customary ceremonies.
Recently By Arya Samajists was held valid. So until either custom is proved or legislation
is passed marriage performed in particular innovative ceremony is not valid
Rajaihi Vs. Selliah (1966) 2 MLJ 40
In Tamilnadu an association known as Self Respectors cult, an Anti-Purohit organisation
whose main objects is to do away traditional rites and ceremonies. Introduced bride and
bridegroom to the big gathering notable person of the place are invited and one of them
is requested to preside over the function and then bride and bridegroom exchange
garlands and sings. The marriage was given wide publicity.
Madras High Court Justice Satyanaryana Rao said that it is good to simplify the
marriage ceremony but it will be a dangerous doctrine to lay down a community should
have liberty to prescribe new ceremonies without statutory authority held marriage is
void.
Ram Saran Vs. Mahabir Sewak
There was a katar marriage (marriage to a sword). The bridegroom who was Kshatriya
sent his sword and the marriage was performed with the sword. It was held that such
marriage is not valid.
In re Ponuswami
Marriage was solemnized by tying of thali in the presence of Idol in the temple form was
a form of customary marriage and even without any priest to officiate at the ceremony.
There was thereby a complete marriage. Court held bigamy is committed by Husband
and convicted him.
Brindavana Vs. Radhamani
There was an exchange of garlands between bride and bridegroom. There was no
homam or other ceremony. It was argued that it constituted a valid gandharva marriage.
Held in gandharva form of marriage the only ceremony that may not be required
to be performed is gift of bridge (kanyadanam). Exchange of garlands being
expressiveof the gift of the one to the other. Ceremony of homam should be performed
as otherwise marriage is not completed.
Bhaurao Vs. State of Maharashtra
There is a prosecution for bigamy the question was second marriage was performed or
not. No proof that essential shastric ceremonies were performed. Court held merely
going through certain ceremonies with the intention that the parties be taken to be
married will not make the ceremonies prescribed by law or approved by any established
custom. Hence conviction for bigamy was quashed.
Ram Chandra Vs. Manju
Calcutta High Court held mere agreement to live together as husband and wife after an
exchange of garlands is not sufficient to establish gandharva form of marriage. For valid
gandharva marriage a caste custom should be proved. This form of marriage is obsolete
in West Bengal but valid under Mithila School.

Kailasananth Vs. Parasakthi

At the time of Betrothal ceremony bridegrooms father placed a jewel on the brides neck
and marriage was duly performed as per ceremonies. Later when wife died, husband
claimed her property. Wifes relatives claimed marriage is not valid as performed in
Asura form so husband is not entitled to inherit properties.
Court held giving form of money or moneys worth to brides father for his benefit
is Asura form. Has Jewel is given to the girl and marriage performed in observance of
ceremonies held marriage is valid and husband is entitled to properties of wife.
Lalit Mohan Vs. Shyamapada Das
Minor widow remarried again in gandharva form. Question arise whether she can inherit
property of her former husband. Held remarriage was Brahma form and valid marriage
and hence as a result she will be forfeited to inherit former husbands property.
DOCTRINE OF FACTUM VALET
The Doctrine of Factum Valet is applied in Hindu Law of marriage to validate a
marriage vitiated by minor regulations. Yajnavalkya prescribed several conditions for
marriage. Some of them are mandatory. If they are violated, the marriage would be void.
Some conditions are only recommendatory. It is to their violation that Doctrine of Factum
Valet is applied.
CONCLUSION:- There are the various essentials for valid marriage. In contradiction to
such condition marriage will turn either voidable or void (invalid). Hindu Marriage Act,
1955 is blend of both old customary rules and new adopted western rules regarding to
the validation of marriage.