Marriage between two female Hindus

 Kanya will be given in DAAN to another Kanya. O.K.

What about male marrying another male (two Hindus).

What is the exact opposite of KANYA for male?

Not finding adequate word:

Male will be given in DAAN to another male. Is is O.K.?

By the way during Kanya Daan, in normal Hindu marriages between a male and female, girl's parents place the daughter's right hand in the right hand of groom to signify the giving away of daughter. When two females or two males marry each other (discussion arising out of two hindus marrying each other) will this ritual be given a go bye? If not, which hand will be placed in whose hand?

Regarding birth without woman or man, I think Christians believe that VIRGIN MARY gave birth to Christ.

No religion permits such marriages. As a matter of fact it is not a marriage,it is time wasting process. How can you fit a nut to nut and bolt to bolt. Is it possible?

The expression in sub clause (iii) section 5 does not spell out the biological aspect, it simply refer the age criterion by using the words bride and bridegroom, and between any two persons marriage one will be certaily refer as bride and the other as the groom . The same was the case in England that led to the amendment in clause (c) section 11 of the English Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, by clearly mentioning one male and female. I am not against HMA, rather I am simply reading the provisions as I read in the Act. By twisting the words or importing fiction will not serve the purpose raher it will be simply stretchinh the words in the statue. Statue has to read as a whole but even reading the statue as a whole it does not change the position in law. Why not we adopt the provisions that will give a clear balance to the statue, inspite of importing something which is not there in the statue. Should we read into the statue that two and two is five and not four?

Ahmedji, when the Parliament in its wisdom used the words two nuts why are you importing the bolt in the two nuts.

Prohibited relationship is clearly mentioned in clause (g) of section 3 of the HMA and its affect are mentioned in clause (iv) and (v) section 5 of the HMA and they dealt with absolutely different aspects and not to biological aspects.

 The provisions as reproduced by Suchitra clearly lays down the conditions to be fulfilled for a marriage between two Hindus and hence leave no room for any debate regarding marriage between two females - It is invalid.

vasudevan

 Parliament in its wisdom.

Great

The other day Parliament passed 5 Acts in 5 minutes without discussion. It is some wisdom. I am told that Narad and Ganesh were gods of learning. Perhaps they would also have been ashamed at the way laws are passed in this country and we are told "wisdom" and "intention". How does one discern the intention of Parliament when not a single word is spoken, forget about clause by clause discussion and voting. In this situation, only some inner voice must be working.

 Even learned people take more interest in discussing absurd issues rather than anlizing genuine problems! Please pordon me if I am wrong !

Mr. Tripathi - Well said.

Well said Dr. Tripathi.

I am sorry that I too was engulfed in his absurdity.

 for "his" read "this".

Thanks all for participation.

Yes Dr. Tripathi, we may be discussing absuridity. But where does its origin lie. While drafting and enacting a statute of at any subsequent point of time?

What is the scheme of the H.M. Act. It classifies marriages in three categories.

(i) Void marriages,

(ii) Voidable marriages, &

(iii) valid marriages.

The Act also lays down specific conditions for solemnization of a Hindu marriage (only five ).

The breach of condition no. (i) (iv) and (v) makes a marriage void.

The breach of condition no. (ii) makes it voidable.

Rest of the marriages are valid [which also include breach of condition no. (iii)]

It is nowhere provided what will be the effect of any other violation.

The only requirement of opening line of section 5 is that the two persons marrying be Hindus and not more than that. It could have been provided that a marriage between a Hindu boy and a girl may be solemnized or it could have been provided under any other condition. But it is not so.

Considering the fact that the enactment is a codifying law (see its preamble) and is supposed to be comprehensive and that it was passed at a time (in the year 1955) when the parliamentarians were learned persons and not in hurry of passing bills like today. It is also a known fact that the four Acts including the H. M. Act were enacted after lengthy deliberations inside and outside parliament, should we import and read any other word(s) or condition(s) therein which were not contemplated by the Parliament at that time or thereafter during the last more than 50 years or even by the Supreme Court or High Courts.

How many of us are devoting more time on analysing genuine problems than discussing absurd issues?

wow !

this act is only made of hindus not for any other religion . so when it say " a marriage may be solemnized between any two hindus, if the following conditions are fulfilled, namely :-

it mean it's only apply on hindus , if one of them is not hindu they can't get married in this act, or i say this act won't apply on them. and this whole act is full of male and femail conflicts.

there is one Special marriage act for inter religion marriage.

 With Sec 376 gone, we shall have these marriages soon. HMA will be tested then.

@ anil

i think u mean sec 377 , but still their is long way to go ,