HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD FIRST APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 80 of 2025 Court No. - 39 HON'BLE ARINDAM SINHA, J. HON'BLE SATYA VEER SINGH, J. (Per Arindam Sinha,J.) 1. Mr. Ramesh Kumar Wangnoo, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant wife. He submits, his client had petitioned for declaration that the marriage is void. Her petition was rejected on impugned judgment dated 19th December, 2024 of the Family Court. She is aggrieved. Mrs. Rama Goel Bansal, learned advocate appears on behalf of respondent husband. 2. Mr. Wangnoo submits, enclosed in application dated 9th October, 2025 is English translation of impugned judgment. There was no marriage as per Hindu rituals. His client was deceived by respondent inasmuch as, soon after getting the marriage registered on 1st November, 2021, he left for the USA holding out he was working with American company Amazon. After a while his client travelled to the USA and found to her dismay, misrepresentation had been made by respondent about his status. Hence, she filed for declaration that the marriage is void under section 12 in Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Family Court failed to appreciate the facts and erred in law to dismiss the petition. 3. He submits, the marriage was never consummated because initially circumstances did not permit as immediately after registration of the marriage, respondent travelled abroad. He reiterates, his client on visiting the USA discovered misrepresentation. As such and otherwise the Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Narendra Kumar Chaubey Counsel for Respondent(s) : Rama Goel Bansal, Shalini Goel Anuja Wangnoo .....Appellant(s) Puneeth Sadashiva Shetty .....Respondent(s) marriage be declared void in appeal. 4. On query Mrs. Bansal submits, her client supports appellant in wanting the marriage to be declared void. According to her, facts are that the marriage never took place by performing Hindu rituals. She relies on judgment dated 19th April, 2024 of the Supreme Court in Dolly Rani v. Manish Kumar Chanchal, paragraph 7 onwards (LawSuit print). Thereby was declaration on what constitutes a Hindu marriage performed by observing the rituals. It did not happen in this case. The marriage be declared void. 5. We have perused, inter-alia,, English translation of impugned judgment. Paragraph 5 of it is reproduced below. "5. In the petition, the petitioner has submitted an affidavit in evidence paper no. 23A in which it has been stated by her that the marriage of the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 01.11.2021 without Hindu rituals, without Saptasadi, without the presence of all the family members and friends. This marriage was a photoshoot to obtain visa which took place at Vedic Hindu Sabha Registered, Sundarpuri Ghaziabad. The marriage was registered before the Marriage Registrar Ghaziabad. The respondent went to USA after the registration of marriage and the petitioner started working in India in a multinational company The marriage was never consummated. The marriage was registered only for the purpose of obtaining spouse visa. After the registration of marriage, she came to know that the respondent misrepresented made false statements to her regarding his life style and job and salary etc. When she went to USA, she came to know about these things. No child has been born between them. Both the parties want the marriage to be declared void." (emphasis supplied) On query Mr. Wangnoo submits, appreciation by the Family Court of his client's evidence paper no. 23A is correct. Mrs. Balsal submits, the pleading on evidence was unhappily drafted. There should be no reliance placed on it. FAPLD No. 80 of 2025 2 6. We see from evidence paper no. 23A of appellant that she herself has said, performance of marriage by observing Hindu rituals was but a photo shoot, for purpose of obtaining spouse visa. The parties had joined together to appear before the registering authority and get their marriage registered. Respondent proceeded to the USA and appellant followed after around five months. Mr. Wangnoo submits, his client already had her passport and visa. It becomes all the more significant that appellant, after a while went to the USA, when she could have gone with respondent. 7. Clause (a) under sub section (1) in section 23 prohibits a spouse from obtaining relief by taking advantage of his or her own wrong. We find, the parties say they had a photo shoot marriage, presented purported evidence of it to get it registered and now have joined together to turn around and say the marriage be declared void. Further submission at the Bar is, there are several pronouncements, apart from Dolly Rani (supra), whereby marriages have been declared void on finding the marriage did not take place as per Hindu rituals. The judgments do not come to aid of either appellant or respondent because their conduct is such that we are unable to rely on their assertions but that they had presented themselves before the registering authority and said they had got married, wanted and got the marriage registered. Still further submission at the Bar is, parties were classmates. Their conduct of being together since long can enable them to join and petition for mutual divorce. We will not be drawn into this murky situation that they have created. There is no error in impugned judgment, either on facts or in law. 8. Impugned judgment is confirmed and the appeal, dismissed. October 15, 2025 sailesh FAPLD No. 80 of 2025 3 (Arindam Sinha,J.) (Satya Veer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAILESH PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad