The Hindu Marriage Act bar on Scheduled Tribes protects tribal custom and does not shut out a couple who admittedly follow Hindu rites, the Rajasthan High Court has ruled in the divorce case of a Meena couple.
Jaipur: A couple from the Meena community, a notified Scheduled Tribe, married with Hindu rites and later asked a Kota Family Court to dissolve the marriage by mutual consent. The Family Court refused. The Rajasthan High Court has now set that order aside, holding that Section 2(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 cannot be used to exclude couples who admittedly follow Hindu religion, rites and customs, and has dissolved the marriage under Section 13-B [Laxmi Meena v. Bahadur Singh Meena].
On October 8, 2026, a Division Bench of Justice Sudesh Bansal and Justice Ravi Chirania allowed the appeal, waived the six-month cooling-off period and told the Registry to draw up the decree.
Why the Family Court said no
The suit was dismissed on September 3, 2025. The Family Court reasoned that the parties had not pleaded any customs, rituals or usages of the Meena community, and that it had not been shown that the dissolution followed those customs.
What was never in dispute
The parties married on June 12, 2017. Differences followed, and they signed a mutual dissolution agreement on September 15, 2024. On September 22, 2024 a community body, the Hadoti Adivasi Meena Samajik Sudhar Sangh, issued a certificate of dissolution. The wife filed a civil suit before Family Court No. 1, Kota on October 1, 2024, seeking dissolution by mutual consent; the husband did not oppose and was later proceeded against ex parte.
As admitted facts, the Court recorded that the marriage was solemnised with Hindu rites including Saptapadi, that the parties follow the Hindu religion and customs, that they have no children, that they have lived apart since 2021 and that there is no collusion.
The High Court’s answer
The parties argued together that although the Meena community is a Scheduled Tribe, they had married and sought dissolution under the Hindu Marriage Act, so Section 2(2) should not stand in the way of relief under Section 13-B. The Bench relied on Labishwar Manjhi (2000) 8 SCC 587, Satprakash Meena v. Alka Meena (Delhi High Court) and Chittapuli v. Union Government (Andhra Pradesh High Court). It held that the provision exists to protect the customary practices of recognised tribes and not to keep Hinduised members of a Scheduled Tribe outside the Act.
The Bench approvingly quoted the Delhi High Court:
“The provisions of exclusion for example under Section 2(2) are meant to protect customary practices”
Both parties had admitted to following Hindu rites and customs, and neither claimed a different custom. The Court therefore held that they could not be sent to customary forums, and that the marriage could be dissolved by mutual consent under Section 13-B. It waived the cooling-off period on the strength of Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur (2017) 8 SCC 746, which treats the six-month period under Section 13-B(2) as directory.
What Section 2(2) says
Under Section 2(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, nothing in the Act applies to members of a Scheduled Tribe within the meaning of Article 366(25) of the Constitution, unless the Central Government directs otherwise by notification. Courts have often had to say what that means for tribal families who follow Hindu practices. The Supreme Court dealt with the same sub-section in the Hindu Succession Act context in Labishwar Manjhi v. Pran Manjhi, and the High Courts of Delhi, Andhra Pradesh and Chhattisgarh have taken a similar view of the provision.
The operative directions
The Family Court judgment of September 3, 2025 stands set aside. The marriage of June 12, 2017 is dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent, the Registry is to draw up the decree, pending applications are disposed of and the Family Court record is to be returned.
The wider point
On this reading, Section 2(2) shields tribal custom and does not bar access to statutory remedies. Where parties admit that they follow Hindu rites, a family court cannot require them to plead and prove tribal custom before granting a decree under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The choice also stays with the couple. A member of a Scheduled Tribe who follows custom can still rely on that custom, but one who has adopted Hindu practices need not be sent to community forums to end a marriage.
Case Title: Laxmi Meena v. Bahadur Singh Meena [D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 411/2026]
Bench: Justice Sudesh Bansal and Justice Ravi Chirania, Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench)
Date of Judgment: October 8, 2026
Appearances: Sudhir Yadav, Mangal Singh Saini and Rajesh Kumar Yadav for the appellant; Avinash Fenin for the respondent