KAPILA VENKATA LAXMI Vs. KAPILA PAROATHANARAYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A complaint was filed by K. Venkatalaxmi against her husband Parva - (SIC) and Dhanalakshmi and others with the allegation that her husband, the 1st accused, had contracted a second marriage with 2nd accused with the connivance and assistance of the other accused. The marriage was said to have been performed on 25-2-1965 at Annavaram. The accused denied the com. mission of the offence. The Munsif-Magistrate, Peddapuram who tried the case as C. C. No. 215 of 1966 on examining 8 witnesses on behalf of the complainant and two on the side of the defence acquitted the accused as in his opinion no valid marriage between A-1 and A 2 had been proved. The appeal is directed against this order of acquittal.

(2.) THE learned Counsel for the appellant Sri K. B. Krishnamurthy contended that the factum of marriage had been duly established and merely because certain ceremonies had not been performed the Magistrate was not justified in holding that there was no valid marriage between A. 1 and A-2, particularly when it has been proved that the omissions were not material having regard to the custom prevailing in the community. Admittedly, the parties involved in this case are Vysyas. A purohit examined on behalf of the com. plainant (P. W. 6) has deposed that for marriages in Vyayas and Kshatriyas there is no sacred fire which is necessary for Brahmin marriages. Even Sapatapadhi need not be performed for Vysays and Kshatriyas. It is urged therefrom that the absence of sacred fire on the occasion was not material for validating the marriage between A. 1 and A. 2 and the ceremony deposed to by P. W. 4, the purohit at the country was sufficient to constitute a valid marriage. It has also been pointed out that there is a presumption in regard to the validity of a marriage unless there is evidence to the contra.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the respondents Sri Balaparameswari Rao, on the other hand, urged that the material on record is not sufficient to prove the factum of marriage much less of a valid marriage. According to him the Vysyas standing on a higher pedestal than the Shudras were required to observe the same formalities for undergoing a valid marriage as Brahmins and Kshatriyas, The presence of sacred fire was therefore an absolute necessity and Saptapadhi consisted of taking of steps before the sacred fire. He also pointed out that the custom pleaded by the complainant did not conform to the Standard prescribed for proving a long and well, established custom.