By using this site, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Accept
Lawyer's ArcLawyer's ArcLawyer's Arc
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Opportunity
    • Paid Law Internships
    • Internships
    • Jobs
    • Events & Workshops
    • Moot Court
    • Call For Papers
  • Editorials
  • Case Analysis
  • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Disclaimer
    • Privacy Policy
    • Refund and Cancellation Policy
    • Terms of Service
  • Submit Blog
Reading: Jains Subject to Hindu Marriage Act Despite Minority Status: MP High Court
Share
Notification Show More
Font ResizerAa
Font ResizerAa
Lawyer's ArcLawyer's Arc
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Case Analysis
  • Subject Notes
  • Jobs
  • Opportunity
  • Editorials
  • About Us
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Case Analysis
  • Subject Notes
    • LAW OF TORT
    • Constitution Law
    • CRIMINAL LAW
    • Family law
    • Contract Law
    • IPR
    • international law
    • Banking law
    • COMPANY LAW
    • CYBER LAW
    • Environmental law
  • Jobs
  • Opportunity
    • Internships
    • Paid Law Internships
    • Events & Workshops
  • Editorials
  • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Disclaimer
    • Privacy Policy
    • Refund and Cancellation Policy
    • Terms of Service
    • Submit Blog Post
Follow US
© Lawyer's Arc 2020-2025. All Rights Reserved.
Lawyer's Arc > Editorials > Jains Subject to Hindu Marriage Act Despite Minority Status: MP High Court
EditorialsNews

Jains Subject to Hindu Marriage Act Despite Minority Status: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court was hearing the plea of a software engineer against the February 8 order of the additional principal judge of the Indore Family Court

MP High Court: Jains Subject to Hindu Marriage Act Despite Minority Status
Pankaj Pandey
Last updated: 25/03/2025 9:20 PM
Pankaj Pandey
Published 25/03/2025
Share
6 Min Read
SHARE

Jain Community Governed by Hindu Marriage Act (HMA)

In a significant ruling, the MP High Court overturned an Indore family court’s order, clarifying that the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA), are applicable to the Jain community despite their minority status. The division bench, comprising Justices Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Sanjeev S. Kalgaonkar, set aside the lower court’s decision and directed it to proceed with a pending divorce petition under Section 13B of the HMA.

Contents
Jain Community Governed by Hindu Marriage Act (HMA)Background of the CaseCourt Observations on Jain Community and Hindu Marriage ActFinal Judgment and DirectionsKey Takeaways from the JudgmentCase Title and Reference

Background of the Case

The appellants, a married couple since 2017, had filed for mutual divorce under Section 13B of the HMA after living apart for six years due to marital discord. However, the family court returned the petition, ruling that since the Jain community is recognized as a minority (as per a 2014 Ministry of Minority Affairs notification), the HMA did not apply to them. The family court suggested pursuing dissolution under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act instead.

This order was challenged before the Madhya Pradesh High Court on grounds of misapplication of law.

-Story After Advertisement -

Court Observations on Jain Community and Hindu Marriage Act

  1. Applicability of HMA Despite Minority Status
    The High Court clarified that the 2014 notification, which recognized Jains as a minority community, did not amend, invalidate, or supersede existing laws like the HMA. The court noted: “This notification recognizes Jaina community as a minority community. It does not amend, invalidate, or supersede express provision of any existing laws. No corresponding amendments have been made to exclude the members of Jaina community from application of any existing law.”
  2. Marriage Rituals and HMA Provisions
    The family court had previously argued that Jain marriage rituals differ from Hindu ones, making HMA inapplicable. Rejecting this reasoning, the High Court emphasized that Jain marriages share fundamental similarities with Hindu marriages. It remarked: “The present-day society is fragmented on religion, caste, sects, origin, and language. Learned Additional Principal Judge attempted to find out the differences between the religious practices of followers of Hindu religion and that of the Jaina community, to bolster his conclusion that religious practice and customs, especially regarding marriage, are distinguishable. However, the practices stated in the impugned order itself show that the marriage rituals performed by followers of both the communities are generally similar.” The court criticized the family court judge for overstepping his jurisdiction by engaging in unnecessary interpretation of religious customs instead of applying explicit legal provisions. “The learned Additional Principal Judge ought to have applied the explicit legal provisions to the matter under consideration rather than engaging in scholarly interpretation of rituals and practices of Jaina community.”
  3. Legal References Supporting HMA’s Applicability
    The bench reinforced the applicability of the HMA to Jains by referring to key legal provisions:
    • Section 2(1)(b) of the HMA: Clearly states that the Act applies to persons who are Buddhists, Jains, or Sikhs by religion.
    • Explanation II of Article 25 of the Constitution: Defines “Hindus” to include Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs.
    • The Hindu Marriage Validity Act, 1949: Passed to validate marriages between Hindus, Jains, Sikhs, and their sub-castes.
  4. Legal Misinterpretation by Family Court
    The court criticized the family court’s approach, stating that it had failed to correctly interpret the law. The bench remarked: “Both the parties had pleaded that they married according to Hindu rituals and customs. There was no occasion for learned Additional Principal Judge to substitute his own views and perceptions against the express provisions of the law.”
  5. Recommendation to Refer Legal Doubts to Higher Court
    The High Court further observed that if the family court had any doubts about the operability of the HMA, it could have referred the matter to the High Court under Section 113 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), 1908, and Section 10 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, instead of ruling incorrectly on its own.

Final Judgment and Directions

The High Court concluded that the family court had committed a “grave illegality” in concluding that HMA provisions did not apply to Jains. It set aside the lower court’s order and directed the family court to proceed with the divorce petition under Section 13B of the HMA.

Key Takeaways from the Judgment

  • Jains, as a Minority, Are Still Governed by the Hindu Marriage Act:
    Minority status does not exempt the Jain community from the HMA.
  • Explicit Legal Provisions Take Precedence Over Religious Interpretations:
    Courts must prioritize the law over subjective analysis of religious practices.
  • Legal Precedents on Hindu Marriage Act and Jain Community Strengthened:
    This judgment reinforces the understanding that the HMA applies to Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs by law.

Case Title and Reference

  • Case Title: X versus Y
  • First Appeal No.: 263 of 2025
  • Bench: Justices Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Sanjeev S. Kalgaonkar

Related

You Might Also Like

SUPREME COURT STRUGGLES WITH JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR’S JUDGMENT, STAYS HIGH COURT ORDER ON NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT

India-Pakistan Tensions: Pakistan Breaches Ceasefire Again Despite Recent Agreement with India

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ORDERS PRESERVATION OF BYJU’S CIRP EMAIL RECORDS AMID CRIMINAL PROBE

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT ORDERS DEPLOYMENT OF CENTRAL ARMED FORCES IN MURSHIDABAD AFTER WAQF ACT PROTEST TURNS VIOLENT

UP COP NAMES JUDGE AS ACCUSED IN THEFT CASE PROCLAMATION, COURT ORDERS PROBE

TAGGED:MP High Court
Share This Article
Facebook Email Print
Share
Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Follow US

Find US on Social Medias
FacebookLike
XFollow
YoutubeSubscribe
TelegramFollow

Join Telegram Channel

Join Whatsapp Channel

- Advertisement -
Lawyer's Arc Logo

Weekly Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!
[mc4wp_form]
Popular News
LAW OF TORT

False Imprisonment and Malicious Prosecution Under Tort

LA | Admin
LA | Admin
18/03/2024
Internship Opportunity at Lawyer’s Arc
Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25-28)
Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2025 : The Future of Advocacy in India
Download AIBE 19 Result Live : How & Where to Download Result Aibe XIX
- Advertisement -
Submit Post LAwyer's ArcSubmit Post LAwyer's Arc
- Advertisement -
Archives
False Imprisonment and Malicious Prosecution Under Tort
18/03/2024
Lawyer's Arc Internship
Internship Opportunity at Lawyer’s Arc
23/04/2025
Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25-28)
18/03/2024
Advocates Amendment Bill
Advocates (Amendment) Bill, 2025 : The Future of Advocacy in India
22/02/2025
AIBE 19 RESULT DOWNLOAD
Download AIBE 19 Result Live : How & Where to Download Result Aibe XIX
23/03/2025

You Might Also Like

EditorialsNews

SUPREME COURT DIRECTS FSSAI TO SUBMIT REPORT ON FRONT-OF-PACKAGE WARNING LABELS WITHIN THREE MONTHS

13/04/2025
EditorialsNews

MADRAS HIGH COURT SLAMS DELAY IN COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT, ORDERS JOB FOR DECEASED GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE’S WIDOW

13/04/2025
EditorialsNews

SUPREME COURT CLARIFIES PRESIDENT AND GOVERNOR’S POWERS OVER STATE BILLS IN LANDMARK VERDICT

12/04/2025
EditorialsNews

KERALA HIGH COURT GRANTS BAIL TO 91-YEAR-OLD MAN ACCUSED OF ATTACKING 88-YEAR-OLD WIFE OVER ALLEGED INFIDELITY

12/04/2025
Lawyer's ArcLawyer's Arc
© Lawyer's Arc 2020-2025. All Rights Reserved.
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?