SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Sujit Narayan Prasad and
Arun Kumar Rai, JJ.
Sweta Kumari – Appellant
versus
Prakash Kumar – Respondent
F.A. No.24 of 2021
Decided on 16.12.2025

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Shekhar Prasad Gupta, Advocate

IMPORTANT POINT
Annulment of marriage – Certificate of marriage issued by competent authority, is conclusive proof of marriage.

Headnote:

Special Marriage Act, 1954 – Sections 25(i) & (iii) – Contract Act, 1872 – Section 17 – Annulment of marriage – For annulment of marriage under Section 25(iii) of Act 1954, it is important to prove that consent for marriage was obtained by coercion or fraud – Marriage certificate has been issued by Marriage Registrar after going through processes for registration of marriage and petitioner/appellant was aware that she is appearing before Special Marriage Officer for registration of marriage and she presented documents as required and put her signature – Marriage certificate has validly been issued – Appellant, a well-educated lady, it cannot be expected from her that she has not understood meaning of words and purpose for fulfilling legal formalities – A lady with such exposures and prudence is not expected to have not understood meanings of ‘Intended Marriage Form’ and signing on those papers without knowing its contents – There is ample evidence to show that appellant married respondent with her free will and consent and she was not put under any fraud or coercion – On the basis of facts no case could be made out by appellant/wife for an annulment of marriage under Section 25(iii) of Act of 1954 – Since certificate of marriage has been issued by competent authority, by virtue of Section 13 of Act 1954 it is conclusive proof of marriage – Appellant’s claim that she signed on all documents of registration of marriage without knowing their contents or significance, because of fraud by appellant, are all baseless, absurd and without any logical basis as well. (Paras 29, 32, 35, 36, 37, 40, 41 and 44)

Result: Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT (CAV)

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.—The instant appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 against the order/judgment dated 27.02.2021 [decree signed on 06.03.2021] passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hazaribag in Original Suit No. 105 of 2017, whereby and whereunder, the said Suit filed by the appellant-wife under the provisions of Sections 25(i) & (iii) of Special Marriage Act, 1954 has been dismissed.

2. It requires to refer herein that vide order dated 12.10.2022 passed by this Court matter was referred for mediation. But the said mediation was failed which would be evident from order dated 19.12.2022, for ready reference the aforesaid order is being quoted herein:

08/19.12.2022

Mediation has failed, as per the report of learned Mediator, JHALSA bearing letter no. 3263A dated 02.12.2022.

2. Admit.

3. Call for the lower court records in connection with Original Suit No. 105/2017 from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hazaribag.

4. Place the case under the heading ‘For Hearing’ on receipt of lower court records, as per its age.

3. Thereafter again vide order dated 9.10.2025 matter was referred to the Jharkhand State Legal Services Authority (JHALSA) for amicable settlement of the issue, but the attempt of amicable settlement failed which would be evident from order dated 26.11.2025, for ready reference same is being quoted as under:

Order No.10/Dated 26th November, 2025

1. Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. However, Mr. Shekhar Prasad Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent, has put his appearance after obtaining the N.O.C. from the earlier counsel. Both of them submitted that the mediation has failed, and this being the first day of hearing after the failure of mediation, they have not gone through the brief properly.

2. As such, they have prayed for an adjournment.

3. As jointly prayed for, let this matter be listed on 03rd December, 2025.

4. Thereafter instant appeal was reserved on 03.12.2025 for adjudication on merit.

Factual matrix

5. The brief facts of the case are referred herein as under:

It has been stated that the respondent obtained a marriage certificate by cheating and committing fraud on 10.4.2017 under sections 11 and 13 of Special Marriage Act. The petitioner has never resided with respondent as husband and wife. The signature of petitioner was obtained on marriage register certificate under coercion and threat. The petitioner has no knowledge about the witnesses who have put their signature on the certificate.

The respondent/husband was residing near the house of petitioner at Deep Urmila Niwas, Hanuman Nagar since 2007 and he was preparing for competitive examinations and during the said period he used to come to the house of the petitioner (appellant herein). By this way both, petitioner and respondent started knowing each other and closeness developed. The petitioner has never seen the respondent as life partner but during the course of study some books were exchanged between them.

In the meantime, in the year 2017 the respondent said that he has qualified in JPSC exam and for appointment some witnesses are required with residential proof and on good faith her signature was obtained on some forms and the same was converted into marriage application and the same has been filed before the special marriage officer.

After submission of the form the respondent started torturing petitioner and forced her to appear before the marriage officer and threatened if she failed to appear then her father and brother will be implicated in a false case and on this fear the petitioner put her signature and appeared before the marriage officer, Hazaribag on 10.04.2017 and from the registration office the respondent and his witnesses fled away.

Thereafter the petitioner returned to her home. Due to fear, she could not narrate the story to her parents but after few d

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top