MUMBAI: A Parsi ’s attempt to get his 16-year-old marriage to a Hindu declared “null and void” as they belong to different religions and the wedding took place according to Hindu rituals, failed in the Bombay high court . A division bench of Justices Vijaya Kapse-Tahilramani and A R Joshi dismissed the plea for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act by Parel resident Jamshed Broacha (38) from his wife Geeta (41), saying there were no merits in his case and his application was barred by law.

“Provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act can be availed and are applicable when both spouses are Hindus, and it does not apply to any party who is a Parsi, Jew, Christian or Muslim. Jamshed is a Parsi, so he cannot avail of the provisions of this Act,” they said, adding, “It is not (his) case that Geeta had made any false statements or misrepresentations to him regarding her religion. She has not hidden the fact that she was a Hindu at the time of marriage.”

The HC questioned the delay in filing the divorce petition. The couple married in 1999, they have a child and the divorce petition was filed in 2011. “No reason is pointed out by Jamshed to show that what compelled him to suddenly realize that he belonged to a different religion and therefore, the marriage should be declared a nullity. This shows that the appellant is taking advantage of his own wrong,” the judges said.

Jamshed had said that Geeta had left the matrimonial home in 2006. In 2009, he filed a petition for divorce on grounds of cruelty and desertion, but subsequently withdrew it. In 2011, he filed a fresh petition seeking that their marriage be declared null and void under the Act. He claimed that he was a Parsi by birth and had not converted to Hinduism at the time of marriage, while his wife was a Hindu. He approached the high court earlier this year when the family court rejected his application.

The HC pointed out that the Act was applicable when both spouses were Hindus. Further, the court said that a ground for divorce is when one spouse at the time of marriage belongs to another religion and misrepresents or conceals that by claiming to be a Hindu, the marriage can then be declared null. In the present case, Geeta had been upfront about her religion.

(Names changed to protect the family’s identity)

