The Telangana High Court held that a marriage registered under the Hindu Marriage Act is legally void if one party is outside the Act’s scope. Consent, rituals, or registration cannot override statutory exclusion—law applies by mandate, not emotion.
TELANGANA: The Telangana High Court, through Justice K. Lakshman and Justice Vakiti Ramakrishna Reddy, delivered a clear and strong judgment that restores legal sanity in marriage disputes where men are often dragged into cases without even checking whether the law applies.
The case originated from a Family Court order passed in Nizamabad, where a woman sought dissolution of an alleged marriage claimed to be registered under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The Family Court dismissed her plea and treated the marriage as valid, without first examining whether the Hindu Marriage Act was even applicable to her. Aggrieved by this, the matter reached the Telangana High Court in appeal.
At the heart of the dispute was a basic but crucial issue. The woman admittedly belonged to a Scheduled Tribe, while the man belonged to a Scheduled Caste. Despite this, the alleged marriage was registered and enforced under the Hindu Marriage Act, which triggered serious legal consequences against the man.
The case exposed a serious flaw in how Family Courts sometimes proceed mechanically. The High Court noted that the Family Court treated the alleged marriage as valid under the Hindu Marriage Act without first examining whether the Act could apply at all when the woman admittedly belonged to a Scheduled Tribe.
The Court reminded that personal law applies only by statute and not by pressure, registration, rituals, or photographs. It relied on the express legal bar and quoted the law itself:
“Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the members of any Scheduled Tribe within the meaning of clause (25) of Article 366 of the Constitution unless the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, otherwise directs.”
Since no such notification existed, the Court held that the very foundation of the marriage claim failed. Registration under the Hindu Marriage Act or performance of Hindu rituals could not override this exclusion.
Rejecting the argument that rituals or registration could override statutory exclusion, the Court relied on binding Supreme Court precedent and quoted:
“Although, an attempt has been made to establish that the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, did not prohibit a valid Hindu marriage of a Hindu and another professing a different faith, we are unable to agree with such submission in view of the definite scheme of the 1955 Act.”
The Court emphasised that the Hindu Marriage Act is meant only for marriages among Hindus and cannot be stretched by force or convenience. It further clarified that mere performance of Hindu rites does not make a person governed by Hindu personal law unless abandonment of tribal customs is specifically pleaded and strictly proved.
On customs, the Court relied on Supreme Court authority and recorded:
“For custom to have the colour of a rule or law, it is necessary for the party claiming it to plead and thereafter prove that such custom is ancient, certain and reasonable… The party relying upon a custom is obliged to establish it by clear and unambiguous evidence.”
This judgment is crucial, as it prevents the misuse of marriage registration and fabricated consent stories to drag men into prolonged matrimonial and criminal litigation under laws that never legally applied in the first place.
The High Court also found serious fault with the Family Court for proceeding without deciding whether it even had jurisdiction. It held that when applicability of law itself is in question, failure to decide it first makes the entire order legally unsustainable.
In conclusion, the Telangana High Court set aside the Family Court order and declared that the alleged marriage, insofar as it was sought to be enforced under the Hindu Marriage Act, is void and unenforceable in law.
This ruling sends a clear message, that marriage laws cannot be weaponised, jurisdiction cannot be assumed, and men cannot be trapped by applying the wrong law to the wrong facts. Law must be applied first, emotions and accusations come later.
Explanatory Table: Laws & Sections Involved
| Law & Section | Purpose | How Applied in This Case |
| Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 2(2) | Clearly says the Hindu Marriage Act does not apply to Scheduled Tribe persons unless the Central Government officially extends it | Court held HMA was not applicable to the woman as she belongs to a Scheduled Tribe |
| Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 2(1) read with Section 2(2) | Defines who the Act applies to, while carving out a clear exclusion for Scheduled Tribes | Used to show that statutory exclusion overrides consent, ceremony, or registration |
| Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 5 | Lists conditions for a valid Hindu marriage | Court clarified these conditions matter only if the Act itself applies |
| Special Marriage Act, 1954 | Secular law meant for marriages where personal laws do not apply | Court noted this was the only lawful route available for such a marriage |
| Constitution of India – Article 366(25) | Defines who is considered a Scheduled Tribe | Used to conclusively establish the woman’s legal status |
| Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Applicability principle | Personal law applies by statute, not by choice or conduct | Court rejected arguments based on rituals, photos, or registration |
Case Details
- Case Title: ABC VS. XYZ
- Case No.: Family Court Appeal No. 195 of 2014
- Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad
- Date of Judgment: 19 January 2026
- Bench: Justice K. Lakshman & Justice Vakiti Ramakrishna Reddy
- Counsels
- For Appellant: Smt. M. Venkateshwari
- For Respondent: No appearance
Key Takeaways
- Personal laws cannot be forced on a man just because a marriage is registered or rituals are performed; if the law itself does not apply, the marriage is legally void.
- Men cannot be dragged into marital or criminal litigation under the Hindu Marriage Act when one party is statutorily excluded, regardless of consent, photographs, or paperwork.
- Courts must first decide whether a law applies at all before entertaining allegations; ignoring jurisdiction destroys lives through wrongful prosecution.
- Registration cannot cure illegality, paperwork cannot override Parliament’s clear exclusion written into the statute.
- Applying the wrong marriage law is often misused to trap men into false legal obligations and prolonged harassment, even when the statute clearly does not apply to the relationship.
This Could Change Your Case-Get FREE Legal Advice-Click Here!
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the Indian courts and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of “ShoneeKapoor.com” or its affiliates. This article is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content provided is not legal advice, and viewers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Viewer discretion is advised.