Sunday, February 17, 2019 | ePaper

Hindu Marriage Dissolution Act needed

  • Print
Zahid Ahammad Hero :
Hindu marriage is treated as a sacrament, or a sanskara, Under Hindu shastra or law, the concept of marriage is more of a religious than secular institution.
According to Hindu religious mandate, marriage is deemed as the last of 10 sacraments enjoined by Hindu religion for purifying the body. So marriage, according to Hindu law, is a holy union for the performance of religious duties. But for the solemnization of a Hindu marriage, some nuptial rites or religious rituals are absolutely essential for the validity of the marriage.
Amongst the good number of rituals, two are considered as the most important ceremonies for the validity of a Hindu marriage firstly invocation before the sacred fire, and secondly taking of seven steps by the bride and bridegroom around the sacred fire. Only then the Hindu marriage assumes the sacred character and sacrament which constitutes a relationship of body and soul between husband and wife. So, marriage according to Hindu shastra, creates an indissoluble tie between husband and wife which lasts beyond the grave.
Whenever the question of divorce or dissolution of a Hindu marriage arises, it becomes a very thorny issue. Hindu law strictly does not allow divorce. So, neither party can divorce the other, unless divorce is allowed by some longstanding custom of certain communities.
But in the context of modem life, it cannot be reasonably, as well as practicably, contemplated that an unhappy Hindu couple will continue to live a maladjusted conjugal life forever. There may be several causes for marital dissolution i.e. the wife or the husband may suffer from mental problems, one may treat the other with cruelty, the husband might desert the wife for an uncertain period, etc. From the Hindu point of view, since a marriage is regarded as an indissoluble union of husband and wife extending to the next world, what happens if it becomes an irreconcilable union? What is the solution then?
In India, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was passed allowing divorce for Hindu couples on some grounds specified therein, such as cruelty, unsoundness of mind, desertion, adultery, etc. And this Act has brought some material and important changes to the orthodox Hindu law relating to marriage.
The law also allows separation by mutual consent.
A civil court in India, on the petition of either party, in due process of law can pass a decree for judicial separation in a Hindu marriage. But why has Bangladesh not adopted a similar legislation? Needless to say, there is ardent necessity to enact a separate law to allow separation in a Hindu marriage here, keeping in mind the socio-economic context of the present society.
In our country, there is a legislation named Family Courts Ordinance, 1985 which deals with matters of marriage, divorce, custody, maintenance and so on. Though in the said ordinance, it has not been made absolutely clear whether it is applicable to the citizens of all religions beliefs. But the Higher courts, through establishing judicial precedence, says that a person of any faith has got every right to bring suit for the purposes as contained in Section 5 of the Ordinance.
Section 5 of the Family Courts Ordinance, 1985 provides that a family court shall have exclusive jurisdiction to try and dispose of any suit relating to guardianship and custody of children, maintenance, dissolution of marriage, dower, and so on. Thus, a Hindu wife is not debarred from filing a law suit for maintenance against her husband under this Ordinance. So, why not in any other matter mentioned in the section, like dissolution of marriage? Besides, the Ordinance has to be applied in conformity with the equality clause of our constitution to maintain its constitutional validity.
So, a separate and distinct legislation, such as a 'Hindu Marriage Dissolution Act' similar to the Muslim Marriage Dissolution Act, 1939, is highly required for the benefit of our Hindu community.
If India, being a Hindu-majority country, can do that, then why can't we?

More News For this Category

Normal financial transaction do not come within the scope of any offence

Appellate Division (Criminal) Nazmun Ara Sultana J       }MASukkur     . Syed Mahmud Hossain J   } ……..Appellant                                         Md Imman Ali J                 }       vs Judgment                               }Md Zahirul Haque May

No provision for fresh limitation from final order

High Court Division (Special Original Jurisdiction)Sheikh Hassan Arif J  }  Mohitur Rahman Choudhury (Md) and Md Badruzzaman  J    } others………Petitioners                                    }                 VSJudgment                    } Md Abdul Kuddus Miah and others------April

Maintaining quota reserved for freedom fighters and their children

High Court Division :(Special Original Jurisdiction) Gobinda Chandra Tagore    J AKM Shahidul Huq    J Ekram Hossain (Md)     ................... Petitioner              VSGovernment of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry

No provision to remit interest lawfully imposed against loans

High Court Division :(Civil Appellate Jurisdiction) AKM Asaduzzaman J }  AB Bank LimitedMd Iqbal Kabir J  } …….Plaintiff Appellant        vs Judgment         } Khan Enterprise and  

Defaulter would not be appointed or remain as bank director

(From previous issue) :Argument of the contending parties 6. Mr. Moudud Ahmed, the learned' Advocate for the petitioner appearing with the learned Advocate Mr. Abdullah AI-Mahmud, takes us through

Temporary employees deserve opportunity of getting permanent

Tariq-ul-Hakim J :Abu Taher Md Saifur Rahman JHassan Ahmed Khan Hassan Ali Khan and  others     Petitioners vs Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Dhaka and others .... RespondentsJudgment June 18th,

Court is legally authorized to review or modify sentence

(From previous issue) :16. Mr Monjur Kader, the learned Deputy Attorney General appearing on behalf of the state submits that PWs 2.3 and 4 who were present at the

Defaulter would not be appointed or remain as bank director

High Court Division :(Special Original Jurisdiction) Zinat Ara      JKazi  Md Ejarul Haque Akondo   J Abdul Awal Patwary Dhaka Bangladesh…………Petitioner                       VSPeople's Republic of Bangladesh represented by the Secretary Ministry of Finance

The plaintiff is at liberty to value the suit

High Court Division :       (Civil Revisional Jurisdiction) Mahmudul Hoque J  Ismail Mia. (Md).............. . Plaintiff- Petitioner                   Vs Abeda Khatun and others……Defendant- Opposite-PartiesJudgment July 10th, 2018Code of Civil Procedure (V

Court is legally authorized to review or modify sentence

High Court Division  :(Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction) Md Emdadul Huq J Md Shohrowardi J Nasir Mia (Md)     . ........ Convict-Petitioner vsState.....Opposite-PartyJudgmentMay 29th, 2018 State ..... Opposite-Party'Code of Criminal Procedure