A pat marriage, despite being a civil contract, is not liable to be declared invalid due to fraud practiced by one of the contracting parties, as the religious significance and bond created by the marriage prevent it from being invalidated on the grounds of fraud.

Prideaux—The parties to this appeal are Dhorkis, i.e., Chamars, among whom the pat or the gandharva ceremony of remarriage is customary. On 25-1-22 the present respondent married the appellant by this ceremony. Some 15 days later he discovered the woman was pregnant, and turned her out of his house. The wife gave birth to a child on 23-8-22. After being turned out by her husband, she brought a criminal case for maintenance in the Magistrate's Court and got an order directing her husband to pay her Rs. 8 per mensem. The husband has brought the present suit asking it to be declared that the marriage having taken place owing to fraud, is illegal, and that an injunction be issued to the wife to prevent her from executing the maintenance order.

2. The facts found are that the marriage took place on 26-1-22; that the child born on 23-8-22; that the woman was pregnant and knew that she was pregnant at the time of the marriage; that the civil Court could try the case; and that as the marriage had been brought about by fraud, which consisted in concealing the fact of pregnancy, and that the woman had led an immoral life previously, the husband is entitled to the reliefs he seeks.

3. In this Court the civil Court's right to try the case and give the decree passed is not disputed. But it is contended that the facts found do not justify it being held that the marriage is invalid. I take the facts as found; for I am advised that a woman, if gone two months in pregnancy, would be aware of the fact, and there is little doubt that in the present case the appellant knowing that she was pregnant by some other than her new husband let the marriage be performed. But does that fact invalidate the ceremony of marriage which took place between the couple?

4. The Chamars are Sudras, and it may he that these pat marriages are derived from custom and not sanctioned (sic) higher castes by Hindu Law. A (sic) marriage performed according to the Shastras is more, religious than a secular institution. It is the last of the ten sacraments or purifying ceremonies; and though a pat marriage may be mostly secular, still it also has religious significance; for a son of a pat marriage is a legitimate son of his father, and entitled to succeed to his father's property. The wife by this ceremony is looked upon as a wife, with a wife's duties, responsibilities and privileges.

5. The English Law, as applied to cases like the present, is clear. The facts that a woman has been unchaste before marriage with a person or persons other than her husband, that she is in consequence pregnant at the time of her husband as to her previous conduct and present condition, do not constitute grounds on which the Court can pronounce a decree of nullity of marriage: see Moss v. Moss, 1897 P 263.

6. It seems to me that a pat marriage is not merely a civil contract and as such liable to be declared invalid because of fraud practised by one of the contracting parties on the other. The religious bond between the parties created by the marriage prevents it, in my opinion, from being declared invalid on the grounds here assigned. And though it may seem hard, in a case like the present, to deny the husband the relief he seeks, yet it seems to me that the latter is one for the caste to settle. Divorce is permitted in this community if the parties agree to a separation; and the matter must be left for the decision of the caste panchayat.

7. Holding these views, I set aside the decrees of the Courts below and dismiss the plaintiff's suit. But looking to the nature of the suit. I direct that parties bear their own costs throughout.

Final Result : Dismissed