Under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, a marriage is valid if the conditions in Section 5 are met and it is solemnized with the customary rites of either party (Section 7), or, in Tamil Nadu, in a form allowed by Section 7A. It is void under Section 11 if either party had a living spouse, or the parties were within the prohibited degrees or were sapindas without a custom allowing it; such a marriage is “null and void” from the start and a court only declares it so. It is voidable under Section 12 if it was not consummated owing to the respondent’s impotence, a party had the mental condition in Section 5(ii), consent was obtained by force or fraud, or the bride was pregnant by another man at the marriage. A voidable marriage stands until a court annuls it, and the force, fraud and pregnancy grounds must be raised within one year.
The difference matters in practice. A void marriage needs no decree to be void, and under Section 11 only the spouses can ask for a declaration. A voidable marriage ends only by a decree of nullity, on a spouse’s petition under Section 12 (for most grounds, the spouse wronged by the defect) and within the limits in Section 12(2). In both cases the children are legitimate (Section 16), and the Supreme Court has held that a spouse of a void marriage may still seek permanent alimony under Section 25. An under-age marriage is neither void nor voidable under the Hindu Marriage Act: it is punishable under Section 18, and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 makes it voidable at the option of the party who was a child.
Valid, void and voidable Hindu marriages at a glance
- Valid marriage: the conditions in Section 5 are met and the marriage is solemnized with the customary rites of either party (Section 7) or, in Tamil Nadu, in a form recognised by Section 7A.
- Void marriage (Section 11): a spouse living (Section 5(i)), prohibited degrees (5(iv)) or sapindas (5(v)), unless custom permits the last two; null and void from the start.
- Voidable marriage (Section 12): impotence and non-consummation; the mental conditions in Section 5(ii); consent by force or fraud; or pregnancy by another man at the time of the marriage.
- Time limits: force or fraud, one year after the force ceased or the fraud was discovered; pregnancy, one year from the date of the marriage (Section 12(2)). Child marriage: before the child party completes two years of attaining majority (Section 3(3), Prohibition of Child Marriage Act).
- Under-age marriage: not void or voidable under the Hindu Marriage Act but punishable (Section 18(a)); voidable at the child party’s option under Section 3 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.
- Children: legitimate under Section 16, with rights in their parents’ property but not in the property of others (Section 16(3)).
- Bigamy: the second marriage is void (Section 17) and an offence under Section 82 BNS (formerly Sections 494 and 495 IPC).
- Registration: proves the marriage but does not decide its validity; failing to register does not affect a valid marriage (Section 8(5)).
Reviewed and updated by Century Law Firm, Delhi – October 2026. Statutory references are to the Acts as in force on that date. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 and the Special Marriage Act, 1954 are quoted from their India Code texts (as on 15 April 2026), the official Hindi text of the Hindu Marriage Act from India Code, and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 from their India Code texts (as on 6 October 2025).
Difference between valid, void and voidable marriage: comparison table
The table sets out the main differences; each point is explained in the sections that follow.
| Point | Valid marriage | Void marriage (Section 11) | Voidable marriage (Section 12) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grounds | All conditions of Section 5 met; solemnized with customary rites (Section 7) or, in Tamil Nadu, in a form under Section 7A | Spouse living (Section 5(i)); prohibited degrees (5(iv)); sapindas (5(v)), unless custom permits the last two | Impotence and non-consummation; Section 5(ii) mental conditions; force or fraud; pregnancy by another man |
| Status before any decree | A marriage in law | “Null and void” from the start; a decree only declares it | Stands as a marriage until annulled by a decree of nullity |
| Who can petition | Either spouse, for divorce (Section 13) or other relief | “Either party thereto against the other party” (Section 11) | A spouse: for impotence, force or fraud and pregnancy, the spouse against whom the ground exists; for Section 5(ii), either spouse (see Section 23(1)(a)) |
| Time limit | Divorce petition not within one year of marriage without leave (Section 14) | None in Section 11; no “unnecessary or improper delay” (Section 23(1)(d)) | Force or fraud: one year after the force ceased or the fraud was discovered; pregnancy: one year from the marriage; impotence and Section 5(ii): no fixed period, but Section 23(1)(d) applies |
| Children | Legitimate | Legitimate (Section 16(1)) | Legitimate if begotten or conceived before the decree (Section 16(2)) |
| Maintenance and alimony | Sections 24 and 25 in proceedings under the Act | Section 24 pending the case and Section 25 permanent alimony, both discretionary (Supreme Court, Sukhdev Singh) | Section 24 pending the case and Section 25 on passing the decree |
| Criminal liability | – | Bigamy: Section 82 BNS; prohibited degrees or sapinda: Section 18(b) | None under the Act for Section 12 grounds |
Who the Hindu Marriage Act applies to
Under Section 2(1), the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Act No. 25 of 1955) applies to any person who is a Hindu by religion “in any of its forms or developments, including a Virashaiva, a Lingayat or a follower of the Brahmo, Prarthana or Arya Samaj”, to Buddhists, Jainas and Sikhs, and to any other person domiciled in the territories to which the Act extends who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew by religion, unless it is proved that he or she would not have been governed by Hindu law or custom.
Under Section 2(2) the Act does not apply to members of a Scheduled Tribe within the meaning of Article 366(25) of the Constitution “unless the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, otherwise directs”. Because Section 5 speaks of a marriage “between any two Hindus”, a Hindu and a person of another religion cannot marry under this Act; they can marry under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 (see the court marriage guide).
Conditions of a valid Hindu marriage: Section 5
Section 5, as in force, reads:
“5. Conditions for a Hindu marriage.—A marriage may be solemnized between any two Hindus, if the following conditions are fulfilled, namely:—
(i) neither party has a spouse living at the time of the marriage;
(ii) at the time of the marriage, neither party—
(a) is incapable of giving a valid consent to it in consequence of unsoundness of mind; or
(b) though capable of giving a valid consent, has been suffering from mental disorder of such a kind or to such an extent as to be unfit for marriage and the procreation of children; or
(c) has been subject to recurrent attacks of insanity;
(iii) the bridegroom has completed the age of twenty-one years and the bride, the age of eighteen years at the time of the marriage;
(iv) the parties are not within the degrees of prohibited relationship unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two;
(v) the parties are not sapindas of each other, unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two;”
Older articles often quote a version that is no longer law. The India Code footnotes show that clause (ii) was substituted by the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 (68 of 1976) from 27 May 1976; the words “or epilepsy” in clause (ii)(c) were omitted by the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1999 (39 of 1999) from 29 December 1999; and the Child Marriage Restraint (Amendment) Act, 1978 (2 of 1978), from 1 October 1978, raised the ages in clause (iii) from eighteen to twenty-one for the bridegroom and from fifteen to eighteen for the bride, omitted clause (vi) (which concerned the guardian’s consent; see the reference in Section 12(1)(c)) and omitted Section 6 (guardianship in marriage).
Each condition has a different consequence if it is broken:
| Condition in Section 5 | If it is not met | Section |
|---|---|---|
| (i) No spouse living | Marriage void; bigamy is an offence | Sections 11 and 17; Section 82 BNS |
| (ii) Mental capacity and fitness | Marriage voidable | Section 12(1)(b) |
| (iii) Ages 21 and 18 | Not void or voidable under the HMA; punishable; voidable at the child party’s option under the PCMA | Section 18(a); PCMA Sections 3, 12 and 14 |
| (iv) Not within prohibited degrees (unless custom permits) | Marriage void; punishable | Sections 11 and 18(b) |
| (v) Not sapindas (unless custom permits) | Marriage void; punishable | Sections 11 and 18(b) |
Monogamy: Section 5(i)
Neither party may have “a spouse living at the time of the marriage”. The test is the position on the date of the marriage. A divorced person may marry again once the divorce decree is final under Section 15. A marriage in breach of clause (i) is void under Sections 11 and 17; the guide to polygamy and polygamous marriages in India compares other personal laws.
Mental capacity: Section 5(ii)
Clause (ii) covers a party who cannot give valid consent because of unsoundness of mind; a party who, though able to consent, “has been suffering from mental disorder of such a kind or to such an extent as to be unfit for marriage and the procreation of children”; and a party who “has been subject to recurrent attacks of insanity”. A breach makes the marriage voidable, not void (Section 12(1)(b)). A mental disorder after the marriage may instead be a divorce ground under Section 13(1)(iii).
Prohibited relationship: Section 5(iv) and Section 3(g)
Under Section 3(g), two persons are within the “degrees of prohibited relationship” if one is a lineal ascendant of the other; if one was the wife or husband of a lineal ascendant or descendant of the other; if one was the wife of the brother, or of the father’s or mother’s brother, or of the grandfather’s or grandmother’s brother of the other; or if the two are brother and sister, uncle and niece, aunt and nephew, or children of a brother and sister or of two brothers or two sisters. The Explanation extends “relationship” to half or uterine blood as well as full blood, to illegitimate as well as legitimate blood relationship, and to relationship by adoption as well as by blood.
The bar does not apply if “the custom or usage governing each of them permits” the marriage. Under Section 3(a), a custom must have been “continuously and uniformly observed for a long time”, be certain and not unreasonable or opposed to public policy, and, if it is a family custom, not have been discontinued by the family.
Sapinda relationship: Section 5(v) and Section 3(f)
Under Section 3(f), “sapinda relationship” with reference to any person “extends as far as the third generation (inclusive) in the line of ascent through the mother, and the fifth (inclusive) in the line of ascent through the father”, the person concerned being counted as the first generation. Two persons are sapindas if one is a lineal ascendant of the other within those limits, or if they have a common lineal ascendant within those limits with reference to each of them. A custom governing each party can permit the marriage.
Ceremonies: Section 7 and saptapadi
Section 7(1) says: “A Hindu marriage may be solemnized in accordance with the customary rites and ceremonies of either party thereto.” Section 7(2) adds: “Where such rites and ceremonies include the Saptapadi (that is, the taking of seven steps by the bridegroom and the bride jointly before the sacred fire), the marriage becomes complete and binding when the seventh step is taken.”
The Act does not prescribe one ceremony for all Hindus: the marriage must be solemnized by the customary rites and ceremonies of the bride’s or the bridegroom’s side, and saptapadi is decisive only where it forms part of those rites. Whether the ceremonies were performed is a question of fact for the court when validity is disputed. An India Code footnote to the Act’s title records that the Act was extended to Pondicherry from 1 October 1963 “with modifications by Reg. 7 of 1963”; those modifications are not reproduced in the India Code text.
Tamil Nadu: suyamariyathai and seerthiruththa marriages (Section 7A)
Tamil Nadu has added a Section 7A by a 1967 state amendment, which the India Code text of the central Act does not show. As reproduced by the Supreme Court in Ilavarasan v. Superintendent of Police (28 August 2023), Section 7A applies “to any marriage between any two Hindus, whether called suyamariyathai marriage or seerthiruththa marriage or by any other name, solemnized in the presence of relatives, friends or other persons” (a) by each party declaring, in any language understood by the parties, that each takes the other as wife or husband, (b) by each party garlanding the other or putting a ring upon any finger of the other, or (c) by the tying of the thali. Under Section 7A(2)(a), such marriages solemnized after the commencement of the Hindu Marriage (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 1967 “shall be good and valid in law”, notwithstanding Section 7 “but subject to the other provisions of this Act”, so the conditions of Section 5 still apply. Earlier marriages of this kind are validated by Section 7A(2)(b), subject to Section 7A(3).
In Ilavarasan the Court held that a Madras High Court view requiring a public declaration was erroneous: “To superimpose the condition of a public declaration, which is absent in section 7A, … would be violative of the rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.” It added that advocates should not, in their capacity as advocates, “undertake or volunteer to solemnize marriages”, though as friends or relatives they may be witnesses.
Registration: Section 8 and the effect of non-registration
Registration exists “for the purpose of facilitating the proof of Hindu marriages” (Section 8(1)). States may make rules for a Hindu Marriage Register and make entry compulsory, with a fine of up to twenty-five rupees for breaking such a rule (Section 8(2)); the Register is admissible as evidence of its statements (Section 8(4)). Section 8(5) provides: “Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, the validity of any Hindu marriage shall in no way be affected by the omission to make the entry.”
In Seema v. Ashwani Kumar (14 February 2006), the Supreme Court observed that “the registration itself cannot be a proof of valid marriage per se, and would not be the determinative factor regarding validity of a marriage, yet it has a great evidentiary value”, and directed the States to provide for compulsory registration of marriages. Registration therefore helps to prove a marriage, but it does not create a marriage that was not validly solemnized or cure one that is void under Section 11. See the firm’s guide to marriage registration.
Void marriage under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act
Section 11 reads: “Any marriage solemnised after the commencement of this Act shall be null and void and may, on a petition presented by either party thereto against the other party, be so declared by a decree of nullity if it contravenes any one of the conditions specified in clauses (i), (iv) and (v) of section 5.” The words “against the other party” were inserted by the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 with effect from 27 May 1976.
Grounds of void marriage
There are only three grounds, all from Section 5: a spouse living at the time of the marriage (clause (i), repeated in Section 17); the parties within the degrees of prohibited relationship (clause (iv)); and the parties sapindas of each other (clause (v)). For the last two, a custom governing each party can permit the marriage.
Lack of age (Section 5(iii)) and the Section 5(ii) conditions are not grounds under Section 11. Section 11 applies only to marriages solemnized after the commencement of the Act; Section 12 applies to marriages solemnized “whether before or after” it.
Is a decree needed for a void marriage?
No. The marriage “shall be null and void”; the decree only declares it so. Section 16(1) confirms this by protecting children “whether or not a decree of nullity is granted” and “whether or not the marriage is held to be void otherwise than on a petition under this Act”. A declaration is still useful as a court record of status, and the Exception to Section 82(1) BNS protects a person whose earlier marriage “has been declared void by a Court of competent jurisdiction”.
Who can file, and is there a time limit?
A petition under Section 11 is presented “by either party thereto against the other party”, so relatives and others cannot use Section 11. There is no time limit in Section 11, but Section 23(1)(d) allows relief only if “there has not been any unnecessary or improper delay in instituting the proceeding”. A Section 11 petition need not state that there is no collusion (Section 20(1)), and the collusion bar in Section 23(1)(c) does not apply to it.
Voidable marriage under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act
Section 12(1) reads: “Any marriage solemnised, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, shall be voidable and may be annulled by a decree of nullity on any of the following grounds, namely:—
(a) that the marriage has not been consummated owing to the impotence of the respondent; or
(b) that the marriage is in contravention of the condition specified in clause (ii) of section 5; or
(c) that the consent of the petitioner, or where the consent of the guardian in marriage of the petitioner was required under section 5 as it stood immediately before the commencement of the Child Marriage Restraint (Amendment) Act, 1978 (2 of 1978), the consent of such guardian was obtained by force or by fraud as to the nature of the ceremony or as to any material fact or circumstances concerning the respondent; or
(d) that the respondent was at the time of the marriage pregnant by some person other than the petitioner.”
A voidable marriage is a marriage until a court annuls it; if the spouse with the ground does not petition in time, it continues and can be ended only by divorce. The present wording of clause (a) and the words “or by fraud as to the nature of the ceremony or as to any material fact or circumstances concerning the respondent” in clause (c) were substituted by the 1976 Amendment Act, and the 1978 Act re-worded the guardian reference to refer to Section 5 as it stood before that Act.
Ground (a): non-consummation owing to impotence
Two facts must be shown: the marriage was not consummated, and the reason was the respondent’s impotence. The ground is available against the impotent spouse, and Section 12(2) sets no time limit for it. (Under Section 24(1)(ii) of the Special Marriage Act, by contrast, a marriage is void if “the respondent was impotent at the time of the marriage and at the time of the institution of the suit”.)
Ground (b): the mental conditions in Section 5(ii)
This ground covers the three conditions in Section 5(ii) as they existed at the time of the marriage. Clause (b) does not say which spouse may petition, so either spouse may rely on it. Section 12(2) sets no time limit, and under Section 23(1)(a) the rule that a petitioner must not take advantage of his or her “own wrong or disability” does not apply to the Section 5(ii) grounds.
Ground (c): consent obtained by force or fraud
The consent of the petitioner (or of the guardian, where the old Section 5 required it) must have been obtained by force, or “by fraud as to the nature of the ceremony or as to any material fact or circumstances concerning the respondent”. Whether a fact was “material” is for the court to decide on the evidence. Section 12(2)(a) adds two bars:
“no petition for annulling a marriage— (a) on the ground specified in clause (c) of sub-section (1) shall be entertained if— (i) the petition is presented more than one year after the force had ceased to operate or, as the case may be, the fraud had been discovered; or (ii) the petitioner has, with his or her full consent, lived with the other party to the marriage as husband or wife after the force had ceased to operate or, as the case may be, the fraud had been discovered;”
Ground (d): pregnancy by another person
The ground is that “the respondent was at the time of the marriage pregnant by some person other than the petitioner”. Section 12(2)(b) allows the petition only if the court is satisfied “(i) that the petitioner was at the time of the marriage ignorant of the facts alleged; (ii) that proceedings have been instituted in the case of a marriage solemnised before the commencement of this Act within one year of such commencement and in the case of marriages solemnised after such commencement within one year from the date of the marriage; and (iii) that marital intercourse with the consent of the petitioner has not taken place since the discovery by the petitioner of the existence of the said ground.” For a marriage today, that means within one year from the date of the marriage, not from the date of discovery.
Prepared by Century Law Firm from Sections 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 16, 17 and 18 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Sections 3 and 12 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (India Code, as on 15 April 2026), and Section 7A as reproduced in Ilavarasan (Supreme Court, 2023).
Under-age (child) marriage: Section 18 HMA and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006
A marriage in which the bridegroom is below twenty-one or the bride below eighteen breaks Section 5(iii), but it is not a ground in Section 11 or Section 12, so the Hindu Marriage Act does not make it void or voidable. Section 18(a), as substituted by Section 20 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, punishes the person who procures such a marriage of himself or herself. A wife married before the age of fifteen who repudiated the marriage after fifteen but before eighteen also has a divorce ground under Section 13(2)(iv).
Validity is dealt with by the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (Act No. 6 of 2007), in force from 1 November 2007, under which a “child” is a male below twenty-one or a female below eighteen (Section 2(a)). Section 3(1) says: “Every child marriage, whether solemnised before or after the commencement of this Act, shall be voidable at the option of the contracting party who was a child at the time of the marriage”. Only that party may petition, through a guardian or next friend along with the Child Marriage Prohibition Officer if still a minor (Section 3(2)). Section 3(3) sets the time limit: “The petition under this section may be filed at any time but before the child filing the petition completes two years of attaining majority.” Majority is attained at eighteen (Section 3, Majority Act, 1875, to which Section 2(f) refers), so the petition must be filed before the petitioner turns twenty.
Some child marriages are void. Under Section 12, the marriage is “null and void” where a minor is taken or enticed out of the keeping of the lawful guardian, compelled by force or induced by deceit to go from any place, or sold for the purpose of marriage, and made to go through a form of marriage, or where the minor is married and then sold, trafficked or used for immoral purposes. A child marriage in breach of a court injunction under Section 13 “shall be void ab initio” (Section 14). India Code also shows state amendments making child marriages after the amending Acts “void ab initio” in Karnataka (Karnataka Act 26 of 2017) and Haryana (Haryana Act 23 of 2022).
On annulment, the court may order maintenance and residence for the female party until her remarriage (Section 4), must make an appropriate order for the custody of the children (Section 5), and must order the return of gifts, money and ornaments (Section 3(4)); the children are “deemed to be a legitimate child for all purposes” (Section 6). Offences under the Act, such as a male adult above eighteen contracting a child marriage (Section 9), are cognizable and non-bailable (Section 15).
Prepared by Century Law Firm from Sections 11, 12, 23 and 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 3 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 and Section 3 of the Majority Act, 1875 (India Code).
Children of void and voidable marriages: Section 16
Section 16(1) provides: “Notwithstanding that a marriage is null and void under section 11, any child of such marriage who would have been legitimate if the marriage had been valid, shall be legitimate, whether such child is born before or after the commencement of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 (68 of 1976), and whether or not a decree of nullity is granted in respect of that marriage under this Act and whether or not the marriage is held to be void otherwise than on a petition under this Act.”
Under Section 16(2), where a voidable marriage is annulled, “any child begotten or conceived before the decree is made”, who would have been legitimate had the marriage been dissolved instead, “shall be deemed to be their legitimate child notwithstanding the decree of nullity.”
Section 16(3) sets the limit: “Nothing contained in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall be construed as conferring upon any child of a marriage which is null and void or which is annulled by a decree of nullity under section 12, any rights in or to the property of any person, other than the parents, in any case where, but for the passing of this Act, such child would have been incapable of possessing or acquiring any such rights by reason of his not being the legitimate child of his parents.” The present Section 16 was substituted by the 1976 Amendment Act with effect from 27 May 1976.
In Revanasiddappa v. Mallikarjun (1 September 2023), a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court held that such a child “will have rights to or in the property of the parents and not in the property of any other person” and does not become a coparcener by birth. But on the death, after 9 September 2005, of a parent who had an interest in Mitakshara joint family property, that interest is worked out by a notional partition under Section 6(3) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and “his heirs including the children who have been conferred with legitimacy under Section 16 of the HMA 1955, will be entitled to their share in the property which would have been allotted to the deceased upon the notional partition”. See the guide to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
Bigamy: Section 17 HMA and Section 82 BNS
Section 17 provides: “Any marriage between two Hindus solemnized after the commencement of this Act is void if at the date of such marriage either party had a husband or wife living; and the provisions of sections 494 and 495 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), shall apply accordingly.” From 1 July 2024 these are Section 82(1) and Section 82(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Offences committed before that date remain punishable under the IPC (Section 358(2) BNS), and cases pending on that date continue under the old Code of Criminal Procedure (Section 531(2)(a) BNSS).
Section 82(1) BNS (formerly Section 494 IPC) punishes whoever, “having a husband or wife living, marries in any case in which such marriage is void by reason of its taking place during the life of such husband or wife”, with imprisonment up to seven years and fine; Section 82(2) BNS (formerly Section 495 IPC) allows up to ten years and fine where the earlier marriage was concealed from the new partner. The Exception covers a person whose earlier marriage was declared void by a competent court, and a person whose spouse has been absent and not heard of for seven years, if the facts are disclosed before the new marriage.
Both offences are non-cognizable, bailable and triable by a Magistrate of the first class, and the Section 82(1) offence is compoundable with the court’s permission by the spouse of the person who married again (classification from the firm’s Gazette-checked data). Under Section 219(1) BNSS (formerly Section 198 CrPC), a court takes cognizance only “upon a complaint made by some person aggrieved by the offence”; a wife’s complaint may be made on her behalf by close relatives named in the section or, with leave, by another relative. The IPC to BNS comparison tool shows the old and new numbers.
Punishment for other breaches: Section 18
Section 18 punishes “Every person who procures a marriage of himself or herself to be solemnized under this Act in contravention of the conditions specified in clauses (iii), (iv), and (v) of section 5”. For a breach of the age condition, clause (a) provides “rigorous imprisonment which may extend to two years or with fine which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both”. For a marriage within the prohibited degrees or between sapindas, clause (b) provides “simple imprisonment which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both”.
Maintenance, alimony, custody and property in nullity cases
Sections 24 to 27 apply in proceedings under the Act, including petitions under Sections 11 and 12. Under Section 24, a spouse without sufficient independent income may get the expenses of the case and a monthly sum while it is pending. Under Section 25(1), the court may, “at the time of passing any decree or at any time subsequent thereto”, order a gross or periodical sum for maintenance and support, having regard to both parties’ incomes and property, “the conduct of the parties and other circumstances of the case”; Section 25(3) allows variation or rescission if the recipient remarries or in the other circumstances it lists.
Whether a spouse whose marriage is void can claim under these sections was settled by a larger bench of the Supreme Court on 12 February 2025 in Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur. The Court’s final order in the same appeals dated 4 June 2026 reproduces the answers: “A spouse whose marriage has been declared void under Section 11 of the 1955 Act is entitled to seek permanent alimony or maintenance from the other spouse by invoking Section 25 of the 1955 Act. Whether such a relief of permanent alimony can be granted or not always depends on the facts of each case and the conduct of the parties. The grant of relief under Section 25 is always discretionary”; and, pending the case, “the court is not precluded from granting maintenance pendente lite provided the conditions mentioned in Section 24 are satisfied”.
Section 26 allows orders for the custody, maintenance and education of minor children, and Section 144(1)(b) BNSS (formerly Section 125 CrPC) separately covers a person’s “legitimate or illegitimate child” unable to maintain itself. Under Section 27, the decree may provide for “any property presented, at or about the time of marriage, which may belong jointly to both the husband and the wife”; it does not cover all property acquired during the marriage. See the maintenance case FAQs.
Where and how to file a nullity petition: Sections 19 to 23 and 28
Under Section 19, the petition goes to the district court where the marriage was solemnized, where the respondent resides, where the parties last resided together, where the wife resides if she is the petitioner, or where the petitioner resides if the respondent lives outside the territories to which the Act extends or has not been heard of as alive for seven years. Where a Family Court exists, it hears nullity cases and suits for a declaration as to the validity of a marriage (Section 7, Family Courts Act, 1984). The court and district finder shows the Delhi district for each police station.
The Code of Civil Procedure applies as far as may be (Section 21). Section 21A, which joins cross-petitions, covers only judicial separation and divorce. Under Section 21B, “endeavour shall be made to conclude the trial within six months from the date of service of notice of the petition on the respondent”. Proceedings are held in camera (Section 22), and the court must first try reconciliation where possible (Section 23(2)). An appeal lies “within a period of ninety days from the date of the decree or order” (Section 28(4)); the limitation calculator counts the days.
Nullity of marriage vs divorce
A decree of nullity rests on a defect that existed when the marriage was solemnized. A decree of divorce under Section 13 ends a valid marriage on later grounds such as cruelty, desertion or adultery, or by mutual consent under Section 13B. See the guides on grounds of divorce under Section 13, mutual consent divorce and judicial separation.
| Point | Nullity (Sections 11 and 12) | Divorce (Sections 13 and 13B) |
|---|---|---|
| Basis | Defect at the time of the marriage | Grounds after the marriage, or mutual consent |
| Marriage before the decree | Void: never a marriage in law. Voidable: a marriage until annulled | A valid marriage |
| One-year bar | None (Section 14 applies only to divorce petitions) | No divorce petition within one year of marriage without leave (Section 14) |
| Mutual consent | Not available as a ground | Section 13B: living separately for one year or more; second motion between six and eighteen months |
| Children | Legitimate (Section 16) | Legitimate |
| Alimony | Sections 24 and 25 (discretionary) | Sections 24 and 25 |
Void and voidable marriages under the Special Marriage Act, 1954
Couples who marry under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 are governed by its Sections 24 to 26, not by the Hindu Marriage Act (Section 29(4) HMA). The grounds differ:
| Point | Hindu Marriage Act | Special Marriage Act |
|---|---|---|
| Void grounds | Spouse living; prohibited degrees; sapindas (Section 11) | Breach of Section 4(a) to (d): spouse living, mental conditions, ages 21 and 18, prohibited degrees; or the respondent “was impotent at the time of the marriage and at the time of the institution of the suit” (Section 24) |
| Under-age marriage | Not void under the Act (Section 18 punishment; PCMA applies) | Void (Section 24(1)(i) read with Section 4(c)) |
| Mental conditions | Voidable (Section 12(1)(b)) | Void (Section 24(1)(i) read with Section 4(b)) |
| Non-consummation | Voidable if owing to the respondent’s impotence | Voidable if owing to the respondent’s “wilful refusal” (Section 25(i)) |
| Consent | Force, or fraud as to the ceremony or a material fact about the respondent | “Coercion or fraud, as defined in the Indian Contract Act, 1872” (Section 25(iii)) |
शून्य और शून्यकरणीय विवाह – हिंदी में सारांश (Summary in Hindi)
यह सारांश Century Law Firm ने तैयार किया है। उद्धरण-चिह्नों में दिए गए शब्द India Code पर उपलब्ध “हिन्दू विवाह अधिनियम, 1955 (1955 का अधिनियम संख्यांक 25)” के आधिकारिक हिंदी पाठ से लिए गए हैं।
धारा 5 (“हिन्दू विवाह के लिए शर्तें”) के अनुसार विवाह के समय “न तो वर की कोई जीवित पत्नी हो और न वधू का कोई जीवित पति हो”; कोई पक्षकार चित्त-विकृति के कारण सम्मति देने में असमर्थ न हो, विवाह और सन्तानोत्पत्ति के लिए अयोग्य बनाने वाले मानसिक विकार से पीड़ित न हो और उसे उन्मत्तता का बार-बार दौरा न पड़ता हो; वर ने इक्कीस वर्ष और वधू ने अठारह वर्ष की आयु पूरी कर ली हो; और, जब तक रूढ़ि या प्रथा अनुमति न दे, वे “प्रतिषिद्ध नातेदारी डिग्रियों” के भीतर न हों और एक दूसरे के “सपिण्ड” न हों। धारा 7 के अनुसार विवाह किसी भी पक्षकार की रूढ़िगत रीतियों और कर्मकांड से होता है; जहां इनमें “सप्तपदी” आती हो, वहां सातवां पद चलने पर विवाह पूर्ण और आबद्धकर होता है। तमिलनाडु में 1967 के राज्य संशोधन द्वारा जोड़ी गई धारा 7क के अधीन सुयमरियाथै या सीर्तिरुत्त विवाह भी मान्य है, जो संबंधियों, मित्रों या अन्य व्यक्तियों की उपस्थिति में परस्पर घोषणा, माला या अंगूठी पहनाकर, या थाली बांधकर किया जाता है; सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने इलवरसन (2023) में कहा कि इसके लिए सार्वजनिक घोषणा आवश्यक नहीं है। धारा 8(5) के अनुसार रजिस्टर में प्रविष्टि न कराने से विवाह की विधिमान्यता पर प्रभाव नहीं पड़ता; रजिस्ट्रीकरण विवाह को साबित करने में सहायक है।
धारा 11 (“शून्य विवाह”): जीवित पति या पत्नी के रहते दूसरा विवाह, प्रतिषिद्ध नातेदारी में विवाह, या सपिण्डों के बीच विवाह “अकृत और शून्य” है। विवाह का कोई भी पक्षकार दूसरे पक्षकार के विरुद्ध अर्जी देकर “अकृतता की डिक्री” से इसे घोषित करा सकता है; डिक्री केवल घोषणा करती है। धारा 11 में समय-सीमा नहीं है, पर अनावश्यक विलंब नहीं होना चाहिए (धारा 23)। धारा 17 (“द्विविवाह के लिए दंड”) के अधीन अब भारतीय न्याय संहिता, 2023 की धारा 82 लागू होती है (पहले भारतीय दंड संहिता की धारा 494 और 495): सात वर्ष तक का कारावास और जुर्माना, और पहला विवाह छिपाने पर दस वर्ष तक।
धारा 12 (“शून्यकरणीय विवाह”): ऐसा विवाह तब तक विवाह है जब तक न्यायालय अकृतता की डिक्री से उसे बातिल न कर दे। आधार हैं: प्रत्यर्थी की नपुंसकता के कारण विवाहोत्तर संभोग न होना; धारा 5(ii) का उल्लंघन; अर्जीदार की सम्मति बल प्रयोग से, या कर्मकाण्ड की प्रकृति या प्रत्यर्थी से संबंधित किसी तात्त्विक तथ्य के बारे में कपट से, ली जाना; और विवाह के समय प्रत्यर्थी का किसी अन्य व्यक्ति द्वारा गर्भवती होना। बल प्रयोग या कपट वाली अर्जी, बल प्रयोग समाप्त होने या कपट का पता चलने के एक वर्ष के भीतर देनी होती है और उसके बाद अपनी पूर्ण सम्मति से साथ रहने पर ग्रहण नहीं होती। गर्भवती होने वाली अर्जी विवाह की तारीख से एक वर्ष के भीतर देनी होती है।
कम आयु का विवाह (वर 21 से कम, वधू 18 से कम) हिन्दू विवाह अधिनियम के अधीन न शून्य है न शून्यकरणीय, पर धारा 18 के अधीन दो वर्ष तक के कठोर कारावास या एक लाख रुपए तक के जुर्माने या दोनों से दंडनीय है। बाल विवाह प्रतिषेध अधिनियम, 2006 की धारा 3 के अनुसार ऐसा विवाह उस पक्षकार के विकल्प पर शून्यकरणीय है जो विवाह के समय बालक था; अर्जी 20 वर्ष की आयु से पहले देनी होती है। बहलाकर ले जाने, बल प्रयोग, बेचने या दुर्व्यापार के मामलों में विवाह उसी अधिनियम (बाल विवाह प्रतिषेध अधिनियम) की धारा 12 के अधीन शून्य है।
धारा 16 (“शून्य और शून्यकरणीय विवाहों के अपत्यों की धर्मजता”) के अनुसार ऐसी संतान “धर्मज” है, पर उसे माता-पिता के सिवाय किसी अन्य की संपत्ति में अधिकार नहीं मिलता। सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने रेवनसिद्दप्पा बनाम मल्लिकार्जुन (2023) में कहा कि ऐसी संतान जन्म से सहदायिक नहीं बनती, पर माता या पिता की मृत्यु पर काल्पनिक विभाजन में उनके हिस्से में से उसे हिस्सा मिलता है। सुखदेव सिंह बनाम सुखबीर कौर में सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने माना कि शून्य घोषित विवाह का पक्षकार भी धारा 25 के अधीन स्थायी भरण-पोषण और धारा 24 के अधीन वाद के दौरान भरण-पोषण मांग सकता है; यह न्यायालय के विवेक और आचरण पर निर्भर है। अर्जी धारा 19 के अनुसार जिला न्यायालय (जहां कुटुंब न्यायालय है, वहां कुटुंब न्यायालय) में दी जाती है, और अपील नब्बे दिन के भीतर होती है (धारा 28)।
Frequently asked questions
A marriage that is null and void from the start. Under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, a marriage solemnized after the Act’s commencement is void if either party had a spouse living (Section 5(i)), or the parties were within the degrees of prohibited relationship (Section 5(iv)) or were sapindas (Section 5(v)), unless a custom governing each party permits the last two. Either spouse may petition against the other for a decree declaring it void.
A marriage that stands until a court annuls it by a decree of nullity. Section 12(1) gives four grounds: non-consummation owing to the respondent’s impotence; the mental conditions in Section 5(ii); consent obtained by force or by fraud as to the nature of the ceremony or a material fact about the respondent; and the respondent’s pregnancy by another person at the time of the marriage.
A void marriage (Section 11) is null from the start; a decree only declares it, and living together or registration cannot cure it. A voidable marriage (Section 12) is a marriage until annulled; it ends only on a spouse’s petition, and the force, fraud and pregnancy grounds must be raised within one year (Section 12(2)). Under the Act, a Section 11 petition can be filed only by a spouse against the other. Children of both are legitimate (Section 16).
Section 11, “Void marriages”, reads: “Any marriage solemnised after the commencement of this Act shall be null and void and may, on a petition presented by either party thereto against the other party, be so declared by a decree of nullity if it contravenes any one of the conditions specified in clauses (i), (iv) and (v) of section 5.”
Section 12, “Voidable marriages”, allows a marriage solemnized before or after the Act to be annulled for impotence and non-consummation, breach of Section 5(ii), consent obtained by force or fraud, or the respondent’s pregnancy by another person. Section 12(2) bars force or fraud petitions filed more than one year after the force ceased or the fraud was discovered, and pregnancy petitions not filed within one year of the marriage.
Under Section 5, at the time of the marriage neither party has a spouse living; neither lacks capacity to consent through unsoundness of mind, has a mental disorder making him or her unfit for marriage and procreation, or suffers recurrent attacks of insanity; the bridegroom is 21 and the bride 18; and they are not within the prohibited degrees or sapindas unless custom permits. It must be solemnized with the customary rites of either party (Section 7), or in Tamil Nadu in a Section 7A form.
The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Act No. 25 of 1955, dated 18 May 1955) is the Act “to amend and codify the law relating to marriage among Hindus”. It sets the conditions, ceremonies and registration of a Hindu marriage (Sections 5, 7 and 8) and deals with void and voidable marriages, judicial separation, divorce, legitimacy of children, maintenance, alimony and custody.
Under Section 2(1), to Hindus by religion in any form (including Virashaivas, Lingayats and followers of the Brahmo, Prarthana or Arya Samaj), to Buddhists, Jainas and Sikhs, and to others domiciled in India who are not Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew, unless shown not to be governed by Hindu law or custom. It does not apply to members of Scheduled Tribes unless the Central Government so directs (Section 2(2)).
They are legitimate: Section 16(1) for a void marriage, whether or not a decree is passed, and Section 16(2) for a child begotten or conceived before a voidable marriage is annulled. Under Section 16(3) they have rights only in their parents’ property. In Revanasiddappa v. Mallikarjun (2023) the Supreme Court held that they share in a parent’s interest in Mitakshara joint family property on the notional partition at the parent’s death (for deaths after 9 September 2005), though they are not coparceners by birth.
Yes. Sections 24 (maintenance during the case) and 25 (permanent alimony on or after any decree) apply in any proceeding under the Act. As quoted in its final order of 4 June 2026, the Supreme Court’s larger bench in Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur (12 February 2025) held that a spouse whose marriage is declared void under Section 11 may seek permanent alimony under Section 25 and interim maintenance under Section 24, at the court’s discretion and depending on the parties’ conduct.
A second marriage while the first spouse is living is void (Sections 11 and 17) and an offence under Section 82 BNS (formerly Section 494 IPC). The second wife may apply under Sections 24 and 25 in a proceeding under the Act, such as a petition under Section 11 to declare the marriage void: the Supreme Court has held that a spouse whose marriage is declared void may seek permanent alimony, and interim maintenance while the case is pending, at the court’s discretion (Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur). Children of the second marriage are legitimate (Section 16).
For force or fraud, one year after the force ceased or the fraud was discovered, and not after living together with full consent afterwards (Section 12(2)(a)). For pregnancy by another person, one year from the date of the marriage (Section 12(2)(b)). No period is fixed for impotence, Section 5(ii) or void marriages, but relief can be refused for unnecessary or improper delay (Section 23(1)(d)). For a child marriage, before the child party turns 20 (PCMA Section 3(3)).
Yes, if it was not consummated owing to the respondent’s impotence: Section 12(1)(a) makes such a marriage voidable. The petitioner must prove both non-consummation and that it was caused by the other spouse’s impotence. Under the Special Marriage Act, non-consummation owing to the respondent’s “wilful refusal” is also a ground (Section 25(i) of that Act).
Yes, if the impotence prevented consummation: the ground in Section 12(1)(a) is that the marriage “has not been consummated owing to the impotence of the respondent”. Section 12(2) fixes no time limit for this ground, but relief can be refused for unnecessary or improper delay (Section 23(1)(d)). If the marriage was consummated, this ground is not available.
Section 12(1)(c) covers consent obtained “by fraud as to the nature of the ceremony or as to any material fact or circumstances concerning the respondent”. The fraud must concern what the ceremony was, or a material fact about the other spouse; whether a fact was material is for the court. The petition must be filed within one year of discovering the fraud, and not after living together with full consent once it was discovered (Section 12(2)(a)).
If, at the time of the marriage, a party could not give valid consent because of unsoundness of mind, had a mental disorder making him or her unfit for marriage and the procreation of children, or was subject to recurrent attacks of insanity (Section 5(ii)), the marriage is voidable (Section 12(1)(b)). The words “or epilepsy” were omitted in 1999. Mental disorder after the marriage may be a divorce ground under Section 13(1)(iii).
The Act lists no separate ground for this. Section 5 applies to a marriage “between any two Hindus”, and Section 12(1)(c) allows annulment where consent was obtained by fraud “as to any material fact or circumstances concerning the respondent”; whether the fact was material is for the court, within the one-year limit of Section 12(2)(a). Conversion to another religion after the marriage is a divorce ground (Section 13(1)(ii)).
Section 5(iii) requires the bridegroom to be 21 and the bride 18. An under-age marriage is not void or voidable under the Hindu Marriage Act but is punishable under Section 18(a). Under Section 3 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 it is voidable at the option of the party who was a child, by a petition filed before that party completes two years of majority (age 20); it is void in the cases in Sections 12 and 14 of that Act.
Yes. Section 17 of the Hindu Marriage Act applies the penal code’s bigamy provisions. Since 1 July 2024 the offence is Section 82(1) BNS (formerly Section 494 IPC), punishable with up to seven years and fine, and up to ten years and fine under Section 82(2) BNS (formerly Section 495 IPC) if the earlier marriage was concealed. A court takes cognizance only on a complaint by the person aggrieved, or by someone allowed to complain on that person’s behalf under Section 219 BNSS.
No. Nothing in the Act validates a marriage that is void under Section 11, and registration does not affect validity (Section 8(5)). If the impediment later ends, for example because the earlier marriage is dissolved by a final decree of divorce (Section 15), the parties would have to marry afresh with every Section 5 condition met at that time.
Nullity (Sections 11 and 12) rests on a defect that existed when the marriage was solemnized: a void marriage is declared never to have been a marriage, and a voidable one is annulled. Divorce (Sections 13 and 13B) ends a valid marriage on later grounds or by mutual consent, and Section 14’s one-year bar applies only to divorce petitions. Children are legitimate and alimony is available in both.
Registration does not replace solemnization. Section 7 requires the marriage to be solemnized by the customary rites and ceremonies of either party, while Section 8 provides for registration “for the purpose of facilitating the proof of Hindu marriages”. In Seema v. Ashwani Kumar (2006) the Supreme Court said registration “cannot be a proof of valid marriage per se”, though it has great evidentiary value.
Section 7(2) describes Saptapadi as “the taking of seven steps by the bridegroom and the bride jointly before the sacred fire”. Where the customary rites of either party include it, “the marriage becomes complete and binding when the seventh step is taken”.
The Supreme Court refers to this 1967 state amendment as the Hindu Marriage (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 1967. It inserted Section 7A, which, as reproduced in Ilavarasan v. Superintendent of Police (28 August 2023), applies to a marriage between two Hindus, “whether called suyamariyathai marriage or seerthiruththa marriage or by any other name”, solemnized in the presence of relatives, friends or other persons by mutual declaration, by garlanding or putting a ring on the other’s finger, or by tying the thali. Such marriages are valid, subject to the Act’s other provisions. The Court held that no public declaration is required.
Each State may make registration compulsory under Section 8, with a fine of up to twenty-five rupees for breaking such a rule, and in Seema v. Ashwani Kumar (2006) the Supreme Court directed the States to provide for compulsory registration. But under Section 8(5), “the validity of any Hindu marriage shall in no way be affected by the omission to make the entry”.
No. Section 5 permits a marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act “between any two Hindus”, a term that covers everyone to whom Section 2 applies, including Buddhists, Jainas and Sikhs. A Hindu and a person of another religion can marry under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, whose Section 4 allows a marriage “between any two persons” who meet its conditions.
Under Section 3(g): one is a lineal ascendant of the other; one was the wife or husband of the other’s lineal ascendant or descendant; one was the wife of the other’s brother, or of the father’s, mother’s, grandfather’s or grandmother’s brother; or they are brother and sister, uncle and niece, aunt and nephew, or children of siblings. Half or uterine blood, illegitimate relationship and adoption count. A custom governing both parties can permit the marriage.
Under Section 3(f), it extends to the third generation (inclusive) through the mother and the fifth (inclusive) through the father, counting the person as the first generation. Two persons are sapindas if one is a lineal ascendant of the other within these limits, or if they share a common lineal ascendant within these limits for each of them. Such a marriage is void (Section 11) unless a custom governing each party permits it.
Under Section 27, the decree may provide for “any property presented, at or about the time of marriage, which may belong jointly to both the husband and the wife”. It does not cover all property acquired during the marriage; other claims go under the general law. Permanent alimony may be ordered under Section 25, and the children have rights in their parents’ property under Section 16(3).
The Act does not define “marriage”, but its conditions refer to “the bridegroom” and “the bride” (Sections 5(iii) and 7(2)). In Supriyo v. Union of India (17 October 2023) the Supreme Court did not strike down or rewrite the Special Marriage Act; the Chief Justice’s conclusions, as reproduced in the Court’s record, leave laws recognising queer marriage to Parliament and the state legislatures, and say transgender persons in heterosexual relationships may marry under existing law, including personal laws.
In the official Hindi text of the Hindu Marriage Act on India Code, Section 11 is headed “शून्य विवाह” (void marriage) and Section 12 “शून्यकरणीय विवाह” (voidable marriage). A void marriage is “अकृत और शून्य” (null and void), a decree of nullity is “अकृतता की डिक्री”, and Section 16 speaks of the “धर्मजता” (legitimacy) of the children.
Conclusion
Whether a Hindu marriage is valid, void or voidable depends on which condition of Section 5 was broken. A living spouse, prohibited degrees and sapinda relationship make it void (Section 11); impotence, the Section 5(ii) conditions, force or fraud and pregnancy by another make it voidable (Section 12), with one-year limits for the last three. An under-age marriage is punishable under Section 18 and voidable at the child party’s option under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act.
Whatever the defect, the children are legitimate (Section 16), and the court can still provide for the spouse under Sections 24 and 25, as the Supreme Court confirmed for void marriages in Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur. Registration proves a marriage but does not decide its validity, and bigamy remains an offence under Section 82 BNS.
Sources used for this post: the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Act No. 25 of 1955), Sections 1 to 3, 5 to 8, 11 to 29 and footnotes, English text on India Code (a1955-25.pdf, as on 15 April 2026), and its official Hindi text on India Code (H1955-25Hi.pdf; Sections 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 16, 17, 18 and 19 read from the printed pages); the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (Act No. 6 of 2007), Sections 1 to 6, 8 to 15, 20 and 21 and state amendments, India Code (A2007-06.pdf, as on 15 April 2026); the Special Marriage Act, 1954, Sections 4 and 24 to 26, India Code (a1954-43.pdf, as on 15 April 2026); the Majority Act, 1875, Section 3, and the Family Courts Act, 1984, Section 7, India Code; the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 82 and 358, and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Sections 144, 219 and 531, India Code (as on 6 October 2025), with the firm’s section mapping and classification data checked against the Gazette text; Supreme Court of India, Revanasiddappa & Anr. v. Mallikarjun & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 2844 of 2011, judgment dated 1 September 2023, https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2009/7553/7553_2009_1_1501_46739_Judgement_01-Sep-2023.pdf; Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur, Civil Appeal No. 2536 of 2019 with Civil Appeal No. 5726 of 2019, final order dated 4 June 2026 (quoting the larger bench judgment dated 12 February 2025), https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2018/15003/15003_2018_2_104_71816_FinalOrder_04-Jun-2026.pdf; Smt. Seema v. Ashwani Kumar, Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 291 of 2005, judgment dated 14 February 2006, https://api.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/27482.pdf; Ilavarasan v. The Superintendent of Police & Ors., Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 6534 of 2023, judgment dated 28 August 2023 (footnote 1 reproduces Section 7A as applicable in Tamil Nadu), https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2023/19914/19914_2023_5_12_46489_Judgement_28-Aug-2023.pdf; and Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty & Anr. v. Union of India, W.P.(C) No. 1011 of 2022, record of proceedings dated 17 October 2023, https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2022/36593/36593_2022_1_1501_47792_Order_17-Oct-2023.pdf.
