Marriage On False Information Of Educational Qualification Is Not A Ground For Divorce: Madhya Pradesh HC

The Court held thus in the present Writ Petition while noting that such false information does not amount to any ground for grant of divorce.

The bench of Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia observed, “whether the performance of a marriage by giving false information about the educational qualification would amount to an offence under Section 420 of IPC or not. Since, the matter relates to marriage, therefore the counsel for petitioners was directed to point out from Section 5 of Hindu Marriage Act After going through Section 5 of Hindu Marriage Act, it was fairly conceded by Shri Agrawal that such eventuality would not be covered by Section 5 of Hindu Marriage Act.”

“..after going through the provisions of Section 13 of HMA, it was fairly conceded by the petitioner that the allegation of getting married by giving false information about the educational qualification does not amount to any ground for grant of divorce.”Court observed.

Advocate Ankit Singh Chauhan appeared for the Appellant and Government Advocate Mohan Sausarkar appeared for the Respondent.

Brief Facts-

It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent/wife is married to the petitioner/husband. At the time of marriage, information was given to the petitioner that the respondent had passed the Class 12th Examination but later on he found that she had passed only Class 10th. Accordingly, the petitioner made a complaint on different forums alleging that marriage was performed by fraud on him and accordingly prayed for registration of offence under Section 420 of IPC. SHO of Mahila Thana gave a finding that the applicant had stated that he is a practising Advocate and after their marriage, his wife is pressuring him to reside separately. It is the case of the applicant that the marriage was performed by giving false information about the educational qualification. After verification, SHO concluded that the husband does not want to keep his wife and no offence is made out against respondents on the complaint of the husband.

“assassination of the character of a woman by alleging that she is involved in prostitution is a serious matter and the Court proceedings are public proceedings and, therefore, any party cannot be allowed to assassinate the character of a person without any basis and without impleading her as respondent in the writ petition”, Court stated. 

After noting that the wild allegations were made against the mother-in-law the Court refused the prayer for withdrawal and granted liberty that if she so desires, then she can prosecute the petitioners for character assassination.

The Court noted that it was also admitted that if any marriage is performed by giving wrong information about educational qualification, then neither it would be void marriage nor it would be voidable marriage.

The Court noted that the petitioner could not justify how the performance of marriage by giving false information about educational qualification would amount to deceiving a person to deliver the property. The petitioner admittedly cannot be said to be property. The word “deceive” clearly indicates otherwise a person was not bound to deliver the property.

The Court noted that the petitioner had levelled wild allegations of corruption against Police officials of the Police Department.

“making a general allegations of corruption against a department or against its officers also amounts to defamation,” Court stated.

The Court gave liberty to the police department as well as respondents impleaded in the Writ Petition that if so advised, they may prosecute the petitioners for making defamatory statements against them without any basis thereof.

The Court dismissed the Writ Petition.

Cause Title: X v. Y

Appearance: 

Appellant: Adv. Vivek Agarwal, Adv. Ankit Singh Chauhan

Respondent: GA Mohan Sausarkar

Click here to read/download Judgment