Laxmibai Chandargi v. State of Karnataka (2021) - Consent of Family/Community not Necessary for Marriage

• JUDGEMENT SUMMARY: Laxmibai Chandargi v. State of Karnataka
• DATE: 8^th February 2021
• JUDGES: Sanjay Kaul, Hrishikesh Roy
• PARTIES: Laxmibai Chandargi (PETITIONER) State of Maharashtra (RESPONDENT)

SUBJECT

This judgement deals with the issue of inter marriages and the right to choice of marriage. Also, the judgement looks into the issue whether the consent of family and community necessary for marriage or not. It looks into Article 21 of the Constitution of India which lays down the provision of right to life.

AN OVERVIEW

1. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the present case is dealing with a petition filed under article 32 of the Constitution of India stating that the petitioner was being threatened by her family on account of her marrying a person against the will of her family.
2. The plaintiff, Laxmibai Chandargi is a lecturer and the daughter of Mr. Basappa Chandargi who filed an FIR stating that her daughter was missing. In the investigation it was found that the petitioner, without her parents' consent went to Delhi and married Mr. Santosh Singh Yadav.
3. It was further stated that the Investigation Officer went to Ghaziabad and could not find the whereabouts of the man but spoke to the petitioner in which she stated that she was living with Santosh whom she has already married.
4. Also she stated that there was threat from her family, even then instead of going to petitioner’s house the IO tried to compel her to come to Murgod Police Station to record statement.
5. The main contention of the parents of the petitioner was that they will have better sense to accept the marriage if the daughter is asked to return home.

IMPORTANT PROVISION

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

• Article 32(1): The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred by this Part is guaranteed.
• Article 21: Protection of life and personal liberty- No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

ISSUE

The key issue before the Supreme Court of India was whether a person can marry someone without the consent of the family or not.

ANALYSIS OF JUDGEMENT

• Culture and society is dynamic, and as we very often say that we as a society are progressing and embracing the change, the very fact that a person has to approach the court just because they developed a liking for someone and married them is disturbing. But, it is a sigh of relief that the Apex Court of India while deciding the said case did not deal with the matter in accordance with the societal norms developed way long back.
• The Court was of the view that if younger boys and girls chose their life partners, this might be a way forward to reduce tension amongst the castes and communities and so, it was held that the consent of family and community is not necessary if two adults want to marry each other.
• Quoting the decision given in Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K M, the court stated that the right to marry a person of choice is integral and would be held within the purview Right to Life under article 21 of the Constitution of India.
• Regarding the conduct of the Investigating Officer, the Court asked the police authorities to lay down guidelines to deal with such cases sensitively and not in the way the Investigation Officer dealt in the present case.
• The Supreme Court thus, quashed the FIR of missing person.
• Also, the Supreme Court while deciding the issue quoted Dr. B. R. Ambedkar as below:

"I am convinced that the real remedy is inter-marriage. Fusion of blood can alone create the feeling of being kith and kin, and unless this feeling ofof kinship, of being kindred, becomes paramount, the separatist feeling—the feeling of being aliens—created by Caste will not vanish. Where society is already well-knit by other ties, marriage is an ordinary incident of life. But where society is cut asunder, marriage as a binding force becomes a matter of urgent necessity. The real remedy for breaking caste is inter-marriage. Nothing else will serve as the solvent of caste.”

CONCLUSION

• Our country India undoubtedly is progressing towards a better tomorrow but the incidents in which a family threatens their own children, cuts ties with them and forces marriage on them, kills the human essence of society faster than a virus.
• The sensitiveness that the Supreme Court showcased while deciding this case is hands on praise worthy.
• Also, it not only held that right to choice of partner is right to life, but, it guided the police authorities to adopt a different approach while deciding cases of such sensitive nature. The role of the police in such cases is of utmost If not performed with utter carefulness, it not only infringes the right of a person but can lead to tragic and miserable ends.

Click here to download the original copy of the judgment