Lakshmi Sanyal v. Sachit Kumar Dhar (AIR 1972 SC 2667)

This case explains two points: (1) If a Roman Catholic priest conducts the marriage under Section 5(1) of the Indian Christian Marriage Act, capacity and consent questions are judged by Canon Law, not by Part III of the Act. (2) Blood-relation bars can be removed by a valid Church dispensation; then the parties are not treated as within prohibited degrees.

1. Is the marriage void because the minor’s/guardian’s consent was not taken?
2. Is the marriage void because the parties were within prohibited degrees, even though a dispensation was granted?

• Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872 — Sections 5 & 19. Part III applies to licensed ministers, not to Roman Catholic priests under Section 5(1).
• Indian Divorce Act — Section 19 (grounds touching validity).
• Canon Law (Roman Catholic) — governs capacity and dispensations for impediments when parties profess that faith.

• The parties were closely related; their mothers were real sisters.
• Before 30 Jan 1960, they had sexual relations; the appellant became pregnant.
• The respondent, originally Hindu, had converted to Roman Catholicism. The appellant converted and was baptized on 29 Jan 1960.
• On 30 Jan 1960, Father Antoine solemnized their marriage at St. Ignatius Church, Calcutta.
• A daughter was born on 10 May 1960; another daughter in Oct 1961.
• In 1965, the appellant left the respondent, alleging duress, intimidation, and undue influence. She also alleged coercion and fraud in conversion and marriage.
• She claimed the marriage was void: she was a minor and the parties were within prohibited degrees.
• A suit was filed on the Original Side of the High Court in July 1966; the matter reached the Supreme Court.

Held: The Supreme Court agreed with the High Court. Section 19 of the Indian Christian Marriage Act did not apply because the marriage was solemnized by a Roman Catholic priest under Section 5(1). Parts III, V, and VI of the Act are self-contained; the rules in Part III (licensed ministers) about minor consent do not control ceremonies by Roman Catholic clergy. Under Canon Law, if a minor has capacity, lack of parental consent does not invalidate the marriage. On the second issue, a valid Church dispensation removes the impediment of consanguinity; therefore the parties were not within prohibited degrees at the time of marriage.

• Where marriage is solemnized by a Roman Catholic priest (s.5(1)), Canon Law governs capacity and consent; Part III of the Act is inapplicable.
• Dispensation under Canon Law removes the impediment of prohibited degrees; marriage is not void on that ground.
• Self-contained scheme: different Parts of the Act apply to different celebrants; do not mix their requirements.

The case clarifies how personal law (here, Roman Catholic Canon Law) interacts with the Indian Christian Marriage Act. It guides which rules apply to consent and impediments, depending on who conducts the ceremony. It also confirms that valid dispensations change the legal position on prohibited degrees.

• Celebrant matters: Section 5(1) → Canon Law applies; Part III rules do not.
• Minor consent: Lack of parental consent does not void the marriage if capacity exists under Canon Law.
• Prohibited degrees: Dispensable under Canon Law; valid dispensation cures the impediment.
• Act structure: Parts III, V, VI are self-contained; do not cross-apply requirements.

Mnemonic: “Priest Picks Personal Path”

1. Priest → Section 5(1) Roman Catholic priest.
2. Picks → Canon Law governs capacity/consent.
3. Personal Path → Dispensation removes prohibited degrees.

Issue

Validity of marriage: (i) no minor/guardian consent; (ii) parties within prohibited degrees despite dispensation.

Rule

Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872 (ss.5, 19); Indian Divorce Act, s.19; Roman Catholic Canon Law on capacity and dispensations.

Application

Since a Roman Catholic priest solemnized the marriage under s.5(1), Canon Law governs. Under Canon Law, capacity of a minor is key; parental consent is not essential for validity. Consanguinity is an impediment but dispensable; valid dispensation removes the bar.

Conclusion

The marriage is not void on either ground. Section 19 (Christian Marriage Act) does not apply; dispensation renders the parties not within prohibited degrees.

Dispensation

Official Church permission that removes an impediment to marriage.

Prohibited Degrees

Close blood relations within which marriage is normally barred.

Part III (ICMA)

Part dealing with licensed ministers; not applicable to Roman Catholic clergy under s.5(1).

Capacity

Legal ability to marry, set by the governing personal law here.

• Cases on application of personal law in marriage validity.
• Decisions clarifying scope of Sections 5 & 19, Indian Christian Marriage Act.
• Judgments on dispensations and prohibited degrees in religious personal laws.