Published on: 08 July, 2025 21:53 IST
By- Gauri Dubey- Advocate High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
INTRODUCTION
Marriage is a significant and common social institution. It offers a recognised format for establishing a comparatively long-lasting heterosexual partnership for childbearing and childrearing as a social institution. It is the main control mechanism for human reproduction. But there is a sociological component to its reproduction as well.
The sexual relationship that is invariably part of marriage gives the children born from such married union validity; this legitimacy is crucial in discussions of inheritance and succession. A stable social unit that is in charge of raising and caring for children is the family, which is created through marriage. Therefore, marriage has traditionally provided the institutional structures required for the replacement of social members and has historically provided the institutional procedures required for the replacement of social members, fulfilling a crucial requirement for human existence and the continuation of society.
India is a diverse nation with rich and glorious cultural heritage where different / varied forms of customs and religions are practiced/professed by the people. One such religion that is most commonly followed in India is that of Hinduism, in which Marriage is considered as a sacrament, Hindu marriage is a long-standing custom that has survived from the Vedic era to the present. Over the years, it has undergone numerous changes that have continued to this day. Hinduism has 16 sacraments, with marriage being one of the most significant.
Hindu marriages are governed by a legislation formed specifically for this purpose that is Hindu Marriage Act of 1955[1].
The statute is applicable to everyone who was born a Hindu or who converted to one of its forms, such as Virashaiva, Lingayat, or a member of the Brahmo, Prarthana, or Arya Samaj. Any Buddhist, Jain, or Sikh person is likewise covered by this law. It also applies to anyone living outside of this territory, except who is a Muslim, Christian, Parsi, or Jew by religion or it is proved that such person is being governed by Hindu law. [2]
The marriage is seen to be the strongest connection between a husband and wife. Even after death, it is an unbreakable relationship that endures. Hinduism holds a deep belief that marriage is significant and extends beyond just one generation, continuing for a total of seven. When conducting any Hindu rites, a person is regarded as incomplete without a bride. It is crucial to carry out all rituals alongside the wife.
IN THIS CONTEMPORARY ERA, DOES THE INSTITUTION OF MARRIAGE HOLDS SAME SACRAMENTAL VALUE IN HINDUISM OR ANY RELIGION FOR THAT MATTER? AND IS IT LEGALLY BINDING.
The institution of marriage in this contemporary era may still be a moral and societal necessity but legally or in practicality the situation seems to be different or contrasting. Indian society is always evolving. Many dynamic changes have been made to its customs and practises, and the western culture has had a significant influence.
Indian society has undergone a significant transformation in its way of life, with individuals becoming more open to the idea of a Western way of life and a self-sufficient way of life away from their culture and moral obligations or duties as a family member which they have started to perceive as boundations.
Today either spouses, mutually or individually on certain valid grounds may choose to remain separate outside the binding institution of marriage by easily filing for a divorce in a court of law, or can permanently dilute the marriage if a request or appeal for divorce gets a judicial assent. The same marriage is held to be void by artificial courts of law which was believed to be the strongest bond or a holy sacrament between husband and wife, an enduring connection that continues after death.
In the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 governing the Hindu marriages Any of the unhappy spouses has the right to file for divorce in a legal proceeding. While Section 13(2) outlines the criteria for only the woman to approach the court and request a remedy of divorce.
CONCEPT AND VALIDITY OF LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIPS: FURTHER DECREASING THE SERIOUSNESS AND SACRAMENTAL VALUE OF MARRIAGES.
Although the laws of the legislature do not explicitly acknowledge the concept of live-in relationships, Indian courts have repeatedly maintained the legitimacy of such relationships while separating morality and the law and keeping in mind the values, ethos, and principles of the Indian constitution.
People in India now have a number of essential rights and freedoms owing to the constitution. Indian citizens have a fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 of the Constitution as well as the right to live and settle anywhere on Indian territory[3]. Additionally, everyone is guaranteed the right to life by Article 21 of the Constitution. The aforementioned rights and freedoms regulate one’s desire to live with a partner of their choice and establish a sexual relationship[4]. However, such rights and freedoms are not absolute.
In landmark case of S. Khushboo. Kanniammal,[5] As determined by the Supreme Court, a living connection is covered by the Indian Constitution’s Article 21 right to life. The Court further ruled that live-in relationships are acceptable and that it is not illegal or unconstitutional for two adults to live together.
In Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P.[6] Even if it may be viewed as unethical, the Supreme Court of India observed that a live-in relationship between two consenting adults of heterogenic sex does not constitute an offence (with the obvious exception of “adultery”). [It should be noted that the Supreme Court’s decision in Joseph Shrine’s case decriminalised adultery lately.]
In Indra Sarma vs V.K.V. Sarma [7] The Supreme Court ruled that although live-in relationships or marriage-like relationships are socially unacceptable in this society, they are neither crimes nor sins. It is quite personal to decide whether to get married, not get married, or be in a heterosexual relationship.
In Madan Mohan Singh v. Rajni Kant[8] The Supreme Court ruled that there is a presumption of marriage between the parties and that a live-in relationship that lasts for a significant amount of time cannot be described as a “walk-in and walk-out” relationship. By taking this stance, the Court is plainly in favour of considering long-term living relationships as marriage rather than creating a new concept like a live-in relationship.
CONCLUSION
By the above supporting arguments, case laws and a summary of present conditions relating to Hindu marriages it is clear that the institution of marriage is not as sacred and of importance as it was considered before the influence of western culture in India, However, marriage still holds a position where it gets maximum social acceptance and is performed with due customary rites and duties. One of the most treasured aims of marriage was to have a large family, but modern life’s circumstances have made this burdensome; in fact, even families with three or four children are disliked and criticised.
The factors that contribute to marriage instability and rarity are more likely to deteriorate than improve in the next years. Our perspectives, principles, and aspirations about marriage are also evolving. So, what does marriage’s future hold? Social life predictions are challenging and never accurate.
[1] Hindu Marriage Act 1955
[2] Hindu Marriage Act 1955, s 2
[3]The Constitution of India 1950, Art. 19 (1) (a)
[4] The Constitution of India 1950, Art. 21
[5] S. Khushboo. Kanniammal (2010) 5SCC 600
[6] Lata Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Anr., AIR 2006 SC 2522
[7] Indra Sarma vs V.K.V. Sarma (2013) 15 SCC 755
[8] Madan Mohan Singhv. Rajni Kant (2010) 9 SCC 209