In a significant ruling, the Gujarat High Court has affirmed that marriages that have taken place under the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA) in India remain subject to Indian law, regardless of whether the couple later acquires citizenship in another country. The Court clarified that such marriages cannot be dissolved solely by foreign courts on the basis of newly acquired domicile or nationality.
The division bench, comprising Justices A.Y. Kogje and N.S. Sanjay Gowda, emphasised that the determining factor for the application of the HMA is not citizenship but the religious identity of the parties and the solemnisation of the marriage according to Hindu customs.
“In the context of a Hindu marriage, citizenship has no bearing. What matters is that both individuals follow the Hindu fath and have entered into the marriage following the tenets of the HMA,” the bench said.
The case involved a couple who married in Ahmedabad in 2008 and later relocated to Australia, where they eventually became citizens. As their relationship soured, the husband approached the Federal Circuit Court of Australia for a divorce, which was granted in 2016. Subsequently, the wife returned to India and initiated legal proceedings in Ahmedabad, seeking maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, restitution of conjugal rights under the HMA, and a declaration that the Australian divorce decree was invalid.
The family court had initially dismissed her claims, ruling that the Australian court had proper jurisdiction since the parties were Australian citizens at the time of the divorce. This decision was challenged in the Gujarat High Court.
In a comprehensive 48-page judgment, the High Court overturned the lower court’s decision. The judges held that allowing foreign courts to unilaterally dissolve Hindu marriages solemnised in India would undermine the legal foundation of the HMA.
The court cited the Supreme Court’s precedent in Y. Narasimha Rao v. Y. Venkata Lakshmi (1991), which held that foreign divorce decrees are not enforceable in India unless they adhere to the grounds for divorce permitted under Indian law.
The bench also highlighted that Hindu marriages are not merely civil contracts but hold religious and cultural significance. While divorce is now permissible under Indian law, the HMA lays down specific, limited grounds under which a marriage can be dissolved.
One notable point was the court’s observation that the concept of “irretrievable breakdown of marriage”—a common ground for divorce in many countries—is not yet recognised under Indian law, despite recommendations from various Law Commissions.
“The absence of irretrievable breakdown as a ground in the HMA, even after seven decades, reiforces the distinctive nature of Hindu marriages. These unions cannot be viewed through the same legal lens as marriages governed by other religious or secular laws,” the court noted.
The High Court warned that recognising foreign divorce decrees in such cases could lead to legal inconsistencies, where a person may be regarded as divorced in one jurisdiction but still considered married under Indian law. It stressed that if individuals return to India and assert their original domicile, they must adhere to Indian legal processes.
Citing the Supreme Court’s rulings, the High Court stated that only a competent Indian Family Court has the authority to determine the matrimonial status of individuals married under Indian law.
The Court set aside the Family Court’s previous order and directed it to reconsider the wife’s petitions—both for restitution of conjugal rights and for a declaration that the Australian divorce decree was invalid—on their merits and in accordance with Indian law.
Also Read: Laid Off After 9 Months: Oracle Employee Asks Why He Was Hired https://www.vibesofindia.com/laid-off-after-9-months-oracle-employee-asks-why-he-was-hired/
