Twitter
Advertisement

Exchange of garlands cannot be treated as marriage, says Supreme Court

The exchange of garlands between a man and a woman in a temple cannot not be treated as marriage, the Supreme Court (SC) said on Wednesday.

Latest News
article-main
FacebookTwitterWhatsappLinkedin

The exchange of garlands between a man and a woman in a temple cannot not be treated as marriage, the Supreme Court (SC) said on Wednesday.

A marriage solemnised with full customary rites and ceremonies alone would get the sanctity under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, an apex court bench of justices Markandey Katju and TS Thakur said.

The court made the observations in the course of hearing a petition by KP Thimmappa Gowda challenging his conviction by the Karnataka high court for repeatedly having sex with a woman and impregnating her on the false promise of marriage.
The victim subsequently gave birth to a boy in 1996.

Thimmappa, who was a teacher, was acquitted of the charge by a sessions court but the high court convicted him.

Both the victim and the accused are residents of Pallavanamashalli village in Shimoga district of Karnataka.
The apex court said an inter-caste marriage may be solemnised in accordance with the customary rites and ceremonies of either the bride or the groom.

Justice Katju said if, according to customs, a marriage ceremony involved saptapadi, it would be considered solemnised on the completion of the seventh step.

A teacher should be a role model, but the petitioner, Thimmappa, is a stain on the profession of teaching, he said.

The court was appaled to note that the victim was Thimmappa’s employee working in his agriculture field. It noted that Thimmappa exploited her poverty, repeatedly raped her and then abandoned her.

The court said the conduct of Thimmappa in refusing to accept the decision of the village panchayat to marry the victim was far from that of a gentleman. Subsequently, he married another woman from whom he has two daughters.

Thimmappa’s counsel offered Rs2 lakh as alimony to the victim in return for his acquittal in the case.

But justice Thakur said: “Let him save his two lakh and spend seven years in imprisonment.”

Describing the offer as ridiculous, he said that “no court would accept it”.

Find your daily dose of news & explainers in your WhatsApp. Stay updated, Stay informed-  Follow DNA on WhatsApp.
Advertisement

Live tv

Advertisement
Advertisement