The Rajasthan High Court granted divorce to a woman by setting aside a Family Court order and criticised the customary “Atta-Satta” marriage system, especially involving minors, while holding that the lower court wrongly viewed the arrangement dispute as the sole cause of marital breakdown.
The Rajasthan High Court has granted divorce to a woman, setting aside an order of the Family Court that had dismissed her petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. In doing so, the High Court also made sharp observations about the customary “Atta-Satta” marriage system particularly when the practice involves minors.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Arun Monga and Justice Sunil Beniwal held that the Family Court incorrectly treated the dispute connected with the “Atta-Satta” arrangement as the only reason for marital breakdown.
The Bench said the Family Court ignored the wife’s allegations of cruelty and the emotional suffering she claimed to have endured.
The Bench explained that “Atta-Satta” is a reciprocal customary practice followed in some communities, where a family arranges the marriage of its son in exchange for giving its daughter in marriage to the other family.
The court noted that such arrangements especially where minors are involved can effectively turn children, and particularly girls, into “bargaining tools between families.”
The parties married in March 2016 in Bikaner. The wife alleged that after the marriage she faced:
- harassment,
- dowry demands,
- physical assault, and
- denial of her streedhan.
She further claimed that in 2020, she and her daughter were thrown out of the matrimonial home.
Following her allegations, an FIR was registered against the husband and his father under Sections 498-A, 406, 323 and 34 of the IPC.
The husband denied the allegations and argued that the real problem stemmed from the “Atta-Satta” arrangement itself.
He claimed that his sister who had married the wife’s brother under the same reciprocal arrangement—refused to continue that marriage after attaining majority.
The Family Court accepted this defence and dismissed the divorce petition, observing that the wife had allegedly left the matrimonial home voluntarily due to disputes arising from the reciprocal marriage arrangement.
Before the High Court, the wife argued that the Family Court ignored evidence of continuous cruelty and wrongly treated her legal proceedings as mere pressure tactics.
The High Court agreed and held that the Family Court had incorrectly mixed two distinct legal issues:
- disputes linked to the customary “Atta-Satta” arrangement, and
- independent allegations of matrimonial cruelty.
In its observations, the Bench stated:
“Tolerance is often mistaken for consent and/or condonation.”
The High Court also stressed that many women remain in unhappy marriages due to economic and social constraints, and that simply continuing cohabitation cannot automatically be treated as an absence of cruelty.
The Bench made further remarks explaining that customary practices involving minors cannot override constitutional and statutory safeguards.
It held that customs cannot be allowed to outweigh the values and legal protections established under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. The court emphasised that dignity, consent, and legal safeguards for children cannot be compromised in the name of tradition.
The High Court took note that the parties had been living separately for nearly five years, and mediation efforts had failed, indicating that reconciliation was no longer realistically possible.
Consequently, the High Court:
- set aside the Family Court judgment dated September 24, 2025, and
- dissolved the marriage under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
The High Court also clarified that its observations would not affect any pending criminal proceedings or custody-related matters between the parties.
Case Title: Kiran Bishnoi v. Sunil Kumar
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
