Bare perusal of column No.5 and 5-A of Nikahnama Form (used in this case) makes it crystal clear that column No.5 required to mention that whether bride was maiden,.......

 2023 MLD 2016

Bare perusal of column No.5 and 5-A of Nikahnama Form (used in this case) makes it crystal clear that column No.5 required to mention that whether bride was maiden, a widow or a divorcee and column No.5-A of the Nikahnama Form required to mention that if bride is a widow or a divorcee and she has children then mention number and names whereas column No.21-A required to mention that whether bridegroom is widower or divorcee and has children then to mention the number and names. It goes without saying that word “then” used in column No.5-A and 21-A is of vital importance and as per P RAMANATHA AIYAR’S ADVANCED LAW LEXICON (THE ENCYCLOPAEDIC LAW DICTIONARY WITH WORDS & PHRASES, LEGAL MAXIMS AND LATIN TERMS) 4th Edition, Volume 4, word “then” means “in that event” or “in that case”. As per WORDS AND PHRASES PERMANENT EDITION, Volume 41B, word “then” is an adverb of time, it also means “in that case or event” and perusal of column No.5-A reflects that if bride is widow or divorcee and she has children only in that event or in that case she has to mention the number and names of the children and if she does not have children then there is no need to mention the same and this column is not requiring to disclose that whether bride is maiden, widow or divorcee and for said purpose column No.5 is crystal clear which expressly requires bride to mention that either she is maiden, widow or divorcee and if in column No.5-A intention of the Legislature would have been to get disclosed that bride is maiden, widow or divorcee then there was no need to separately incorporate column No.5 prior to that in sequence, hence plain reading of column No.5 and column 5-A reflects that column No.5 requires bride to mention that either she is maiden, widow or divorcee whereas column No.5-A does not require so and only requires to mention number and names of children if she is widow or divorcee and having children but any column having language like column No.5 was not available in the Nikahnama Form (used in this case) for bridegroom and its column No.21-A is having same language as of column No.5-A, therefore, in its column No.21-A, bridegroom was not required to tell that he was widower or divorcee but if he was widower or divorcee and having children from said marriage(s) then to tell number and names of the children. Wisdom of Legislature behind column No.5-A and 21-A is that bride and bridegroom must know liabilities of children (if any) of each other from earlier marriage(s); and in this case it is admitted fact that respondent No.5 was having no children from earlier marriage. So, any column expressly requiring bridegroom to disclose that he was widower or divorcee was not available in the Nikahnama Form used in this case.

Though in 2017 when this marriage was contracted, Nikahnama Form which was to be used, of course, requires bridegroom to expressly mention that either he is widower or divorcee yet Nikahnama Form which was used in this case was not containing the column to expressly mention said fact. If Nikah Registrar has not incorporated contract of Nikah of the parties on appropriate and amended Form then it is no fault on part of bridegroom. It is well settled principle of law that for the purpose of invoking criminal law, benefit of each and every doubt at each and every stage goes to the accused/proposed accused and when it is not the case of the petitioner that Form of Nikahnama (Annex-B) was used in this case due to any act or omission of respondents No.5 to 8 and admittedly said Nikahnama Form was not containing any column which expressly required to mention that either bridegroom/respondent No.5 was widower or divorcee then respondents No.5 to 8 cannot be burdened with any criminal liability.