Solemnization And Dissolution Of Christian Marriage

Introduction

The Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872 governs marital laws of Christians. A Christian is a person who professes Christianity. A Christian marriage can be solemnized between two Christians or between a Christian and a non-Christian. This is laid down under Section 4 of the Act. Thus, the laws under the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872 would extend to a married couple whose marriage is solemnized as per the provisions of the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872 regardless of Christianity not being the religion of one of them.

The applicability of the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872 is restricted to marriage related laws. Dissolution of marriage is not governed by the Act. In order to terminate the marriage between a married couple whose marriage took place in accordance with the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872, reliance has to be placed on The Divorce Act, 1869.

The Indian Christian Marriage Act does not cover dissolution of marriage. It only deals with registration of marriage.

Solemnization Of Christian Marriage

In order for a marriage to be considered valid as per Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872, eitherboth the parties or one of the parties to the Christian marriage ought to be a Christian. In case the personal laws of either of the parties prohibit the marriage, the same would not be considered valid under the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872.

Since, the marriage does not have to be between two Christians, is not necessary for a person intending to have a marriage under the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872 to get baptised. This was laid down in the case of K.J.B. David v. Nilamoni Devi.

In order to solemnise a christian marriage, the person has to be a pastor of a non-Catholic Church, a Marriage Registrar, any Christian authorised by the State Government or priest of a Roman Catholic Church. The said persons can also solemnise a marriage between a Christian and a non-Christian.

The State Government grants license to a Pastor of non-Catholic Church under Section 6 of the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872 to authorise him to solemnise a marriage. A Pastor of a non-Catholic Church who solemnises a marriage without a license by the State Government is liable to be punished with imprisonment which may extend to ten years as per Section 68 of the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872.

Minority And Marriage

The Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872 defines minor as a person who has not attained the age of twenty-one years. In addition to that, such a person must not be a widower or a widow. The marriage between two parties where either of them is a minor can be solemnised under the Act. A licensed Pastor can solemnize marriage when either of the party is a minor. Section 15 of the Act requires every Minister totransfer the notice received from two parties intending to get their marriage solemnised when one of them is a minorto the Marriage Registrar.

If parties have not attained the age of consent i.e. they are minors, then the consent of the father of the minor needs to be obtained before getting the marriage solemnised and in case the father has passed away, the consent of the guardian of the minor and if the guardian is also deceased then the mother of the minor needs to give her consent.

In Lakshmi Sanyak v Sanchit Kumar Dharthe Apex Court held that under Canon 88 of the Roman Catholic Church the age of capacity to contract is attained at 16 years for a man and 14 years for a woman. Even though, at that age the parties would be minors, the validity of a Christian marriage being a contract is not affected by that. The Cannon Law governs prohibited relationships as well.

It has to be understood that a Court of Law holds a superior position than the Cannon Law. Thus, if a relationship is exempted from the prohibited degrees by a Court of Law it can no more be considered as prohibited by the Cannon Law.

Essentials

  • Section 10 of the Act states that a Christian marriage should be solemnised by a priest between 6 in the morning and seven in the evening after receiving a general or special license
  • Section 11 states that a clergymen belonging to the Church of England have to solemnise a marriage in a Church barring exceptional cases where there is no church within five miles of distance or they have a special license.
  • A Christian marriage can be solemnised between two parties having no living spouses at the time of marriage. The man must be at least 21 years old and the woman must be at least 18 years old. The marriage needs to be solemnised in the presence of at least two witnesses

Dissolution

Dissolution of a Christian marriage is covered under the Divorce Act, 1869. As per Section 2 of the Divorce Act, 1869, in order to seek relief under this Act one of the parties that is either the petitioner or the respondent must be a Christian by religion.

Section 10 of the Divorce Act, 1869 provides instances as to when a Christian marriage can be terminated. The first and the foremost ground is that of adultery. In addition to that, a wife may initiate divorce proceedings against her spouse who has committed cruelty on her or is accused of rape, sodomy, bestiality. If one of the spouse converts to another religion, then also marriage may be dissolved. In case of unsound mind, sexually transmitted diseases and desertion of the petitioner by their spouse for a period equal to or more than two years a divorce can be sought on such grounds.

[Image Sources: Shutterstock]

chirstion marrage

Section 10A of The Divorce Act, 1869 prescribes a two or more years of separation period before a marriage can be dissolved by mutual consent. This provision was held arbitrary and offensive by the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in Saumya Ann Thomas v. The Union of India in the year 2010. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court held that the stipulated period of two years has to be read as one year because The Special Marriage Act’s Section 28(1), the Hindu Marriage Act’s Section 13B(1), and the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act’s Section 32B(1) all stipulate a one-year period.

Recently in 2022, the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in Anup Disalva v. Union of India struck down the minimum separation period of one year as stipulated under Section 10A of The Divorce Act, 1869 being violative of the fundamental rights.

Author: Sonakshi Pandey,  A Student at Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA, in case of any queries please contact/write back to us via email to chhavi@khuranaandkhurana.com or at Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorney.

References

  1. Lakshmi Sanyal v. Sachit Kumar Dhar, (1972) 2 SCC 647
  2. J.B. David v. Nilamoni Devi, 1952 SCC OnLine Ori 24
  3. C.V. Subba Rao’s Family Law in India
  4. Saumya Ann Thomas v. Union of India, 2010 SCC OnLine Ker 5197
  5. Anup Disalva v. Union of India, 2022 SCC OnLine Ker 6415

Leave a Reply

Categories

Archives

  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • September 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010