Family, Marriage & Divorce

In Lila Gupta v. Laxmi Narain & Ors [1978 AIR 1351], the Supreme Court held that a marriage contracted in violation of the (then-existing) proviso to Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act is not void, since the legislature had not expressly declared it to be so, even though it made no provision for legitimating the offspring of such a marriage.

In Ishwar Chand Sharma & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another [2026 INSC 587], the Supreme Court observed that a growing trend of vexatious matrimonial litigation involving omnibus allegations, false POCSO complaints, and misuse of criminal law as an "arm-twisting tactic" is burdening courts and causing harassment to innocent persons, while simultaneously overshadowing genuine cases that deserve urgent judicial attention.

A couple already married under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) can register their marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 (SMA), without requiring a divorce. Once registered under the SMA, the marriage is governed by that Act and not by the HMA. The SMA provides a secular, civil marriage option for any two individuals.

Parties to a marriage, subsequently declared void, can continue a petition for return of gold / stridhan before the Family Court, even after the marriage is declared void.

In Indian Family Courts, particularly in Kerala, different reliefs require the filing of separate Original Petitions (OP) for Divorce, Maintenance, Return of Gold, and Child Custody. This is because these reliefs are governed by distinct statutes and specific procedural rules.

The first wife must be given notice and an opportunity to be heard when her husband seeks to register a second marriage under the Kerala Registration of Marriages (Common) Rules, 2008, the Kerala High Court observed in Muhammad Shareef C & Another v. State of Kerala & Another. [2025: KER:82441].

In Kizhakkayi Dasan v. Kuniyil Cheerootty and Another [2025:KER:72048], the High Court of Kerala observed that a woman who contracts a subsequent marriage with a man during the subsistence of her earlier marriage cannot be regarded as a ‘wife’ within the meaning of Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The Supreme Court, in Chowdamma (D) by LR and Another Versus Venkatappa (D) by LRs and Another (2025 INSC 1038), states that when a man and woman live together as husband and wife for a prolonged period, the law presumes a valid marriage in such a case.