The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for concrete and convincing evidence to establish the validity of a marriage, and the consequences of unauthorized and illegal marriage registration processes.

JUDGMENT :

G.A. SANAP, J.

The appellant/original respondent filed this appeal under section 19 of the Family Court’s Act, 1984 against the Judgment and order dated 30-8-2018, passed by the Family Court, Amravati, whereby the learned Judge of the Family Court had allowed the petition filed by the respondent No. 1/original petitioner and declared so called marriage of the respondent No. 1 and appellant as null and void and further declared the status of the respondent No. 1 as ‘Maiden’ and not married.

2. The Cross Objection No. 75 of 2021 is filed by Mr. Mahesh Dinkar Deshmukh, who was examined as a witness for the appellant/respondent. He has challenged the judgment and order to the extent of direction No. 4(iv) mentioned in the operative part of the order.

3. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows :

The respondent No. 1 is a Hindu girl. The appellant is the Mahomedan boy. It is the case of the respondent No. 1 that they reside in the same locality. The sister of appellant by name Likhita was the friend of respondent No. 1. The respondent No. 1 used to visit the house of Likhita. The appellant and the respondent No. 1 came into contact at the house of the appellant. The appellant developed intimacy with the respondent No. 1. The appellant gave a proposal for marriage to the respondent No. 1. The respondent No.1 refused the same. The appellant, therefore, got annoyed. He abused the respondent No. 1. The respondent No. 1, therefore, dis-continued her relations. However, at the instance of sister of the appellant the respondent No. 1 continued to visit the house of the appellant. It is further case of the respondent No. 1 that in the month of January-2012, she wanted to obtain the driving licence. The appellant came to know about this fact from his sister Likhita and therefore, contacted the respondent No. 1. He collected the documents from the respondent No. 1 namely Ration Card, Identity card issued by D.Ed. College, Passport size photo etc. After obtaining the driving licence he did not return the documents. It is further case of the respondent No. 1 that the appellant continued to harass the respondent No. 1. On 19-4-2012, the appellant met the respondent No. 1 and her elder sister near Asmita Vidya Mandir, Amravati. He misbehaved with them. When the sister of the respondent No. 1 told the appellant to behave properly with the respondent No. 1, the appellant disclosed that the respondent No. 1 is his married wife. He disclosed that they got married on 7-4-2012 at Chandrakala Vivah Mandal, Amravati.

4. The respondent No. 1 and her sister were shocked after getting this information. They went to Chandrakala Vivah Mandal, Amravati to make inquiry of the fact as disclosed by the appellant. The respondent No. 1 came to know that her documents were misused and the appellant obtained the forged marriage certificate from the said Chandrakala Vivah Mandal. On further inquiry made by the respondent No. 1, it revealed that the appellant had also obtained some documents related to the respondent No. 1 from Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Amravati. The respondent No. 1 informed this fact to her parents. The report was lodged against the appellant. The appellant started extending threats to the respondent No. 1 and her family members. He threatened the respondent No. 1 and her family members that he would give wide publicity to their marriage and create hurdles in the way of marriage of elder sister of the respondent No. 1. According to the respondent No. 1, the appellant with the help of other people forged the Nikahnama and marriage certificate. The respondent No. 1 is Hindu by birth. She was never converted to Islam religion. She never married with the appellant. She, therefore, prayed for a declaration that so called marriage was null and void and also for declaration that her status is a ‘Maiden’ and not married.

5. The appellant filed the written statement and opposed the petition filed by the respondent No. 1. He denied the material fa