Spouse, who hid past marriage, cited inflated salary, has committed fraud; rules Delhi High Court and annuls marriage

When someone is getting married, the bride’s family usually asks about the groom’s salary and if he has any previous relationships, etc. A bridegroom from Delhi, however, misled them on both counts. He not only lied about his real salary but also gave the impression that he had never been married before, even though he had a child from a previous marriage.

In his defence, the husband claimed that his profile on shaadi.com was created by his parents, who were unaware of his previous marriage and subsequent divorce. He mentioned that during his meeting with his future wife at Cafe Coffee Day (CCD) in November 2014, he had talked about his previous marriage in detail, and his sister was present there. Therefore, he argued that he couldn’t be accused of fraud.

On the other hand, the wife’s lawyers stressed on the event that his Shaadi.com profile on whose basis she married him said that he was “unmarried” and it did not say “divorced”. She would further submit that there is a clear difference between the use of the word “unmarried” and “divorced”. She said that he committed fraud by representing himself to be not married and also that he was earning an amount as salary which was far above what was the truth.

In response, the husband argued that his Shaadi.com profile indicated “unmarried” which meant unmarried at the time the profile was created, and not unmarried in the past. The Delhi High Court heard them both and then analysed the provisions of Section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and ultimately ruled in the wife’s favour, and ordered annulment of marriage.

For the uninitiated, annulment of marriage means that the marriage is considered never to have taken place and is very much different from divorce and alimony and maintenance obligations.

Check out the details below to know why the husband lost this case and the wife won it.

Family Court had ordered annulment of marriage

The primary terms on which the Family Court has deemed it necessary to annul the marriage are: –

1. The concealment by the Appellant (husband) of the fact of his prior marriage, and
2. The discrepancy in the salary figures that had been set out by the Appellant (husband).

Delhi High Court said: “These findings were based on an analysis of the online profile of the Appellant (husband) on the matrimonial portal “www.shaadi.com” and on the basis of which the Respondent (wife) herein had responded to the advertised profile of the Appellant.”

Delhi High Court analyses Section 12(1)(c) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

According to the order of Delhi High Court dated August 20, 2025, here’s the court’s analysis:

• Section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 allows annulment of a marriage on specific grounds, including fraud “…as to any material fact or circumstance concerning the respondent”.
• The sole issue for determination is whether the online matrimonial profile of the Appellant (husband), which contained incorrect particulars that he was “never married” and that his annual income was “USD 200K and above”, constitutes misrepresentation of such a material fact or circumstance as contemplated under the statute.
• The answer to this question depends not merely on the falsity of the statements, but on whether those particulars were so essential that the Respondent’s (wife) consent was procured under a mistaken belief induced by them.
• The conspectus of the facts and the evidence would lead us to the inevitable conclusion that the Appellant (husband) herein has, in his profile, mentioned that he has been “never married”.
• This is an unambiguous representation, understood in ordinary parlance as a categorical statement that the person has never entered into any marital relationship at any time in their life.
• However, in his pleadings, the Appellant (husband) attempted to describe himself merely as “unmarried” and to interpret the same in an artificially narrow sense, namely, that he was “not married” at the precise point in time when he married the Respondent. Such a contention is entirely flawed.
• This, it would appear, was canvassed, keeping in mind the Shaadi.com profile, which makes an unambiguous claim that the Appellant was “Never Married”. The expressions “never married” and “unmarried”, though superficially similar, differ in their scope and implication when viewed in the context of matrimonial consent.
• Delhi High Court says the words never married and unmarried has huge difference
• Delhi High Court said that the word “Never married” conveys a lifelong status, free from any prior marital tie, whereas “unmarried” could ambiguously include those who are divorced or widowed.
• The High Court also said that the expression “Never Married” is a declaration that a person has never undergone a marriage and is substantially different from the term “unmarried”, which could lend itself to a possible interpretation of a person having been “Never Married” or of a circumstance at a particular point in time of not being in matrimony with anyone.
• Also read: Husband has to pay income tax for wife’s Rs 17-crore land sale deal due to this reason; ITAT Bangalore ruling explained
• The Delhi High Court said that by seeking to merge the two words, the Husband not only undermines the plain and natural meaning of the words, but also attempts to diminish the significance of the false representation made in his profile.
• Also read: Wife with Rs 16 lakh annual income asks for maintenance; husband fights back and wins the case, here’s how
• Delhi High Court said: “This Court cannot countenance such a strained and self-serving interpretation, as it would allow parties to evade accountability for false declarations that directly influence the other party’s decision to marry.”
• Also read: No income tax for lady who sold land for Rs 4.5 crore; Know how a 1955 circular and established case laws saved the day for her
• Delhi High Court said that in this case the Family Court has rightly identified the two determinative factors, the fact of the Husband’s prior marriage and his stated salary.
• Also read: Husband files for divorce from wife citing her mental illness started much before marriage; High Court denies divorce on this ground
• Delhi High Court said: “Both these factors are of such decisive importance in a person’s matrimonial decision-making process that their concealment squarely falls within the meaning of a “material fact or circumstance”, the suppression of which renders the resulting marriage liable to annulment.”
• Also read: Father receives Rs 4 lakh as cash gift in son’s marriage and wins income tax case of unexplained income; ITAT Ahmedabad ruling explained
• Delhi High Court emphasised another critical aspect: Husband had a child from first marriage
• Delhi High Court said:
• “We must note that, though the learned Family Court did not examine this aspect, we consider it necessary to emphasize another critical aspect, which is the fact that the Appellant (husband) has a child from his earlier marriage.”
• “We believe that such a circumstance is profoundly material to any prospective spouse’s decision on whether to marry. Even if one assumes that the mere fact of a prior, now-dissolved marriage might not always be decisive, the existence of a child, in our view, could carry significant weight for making a decision.”
• Also read: Wife gets tax notice for husband’s Rs 6.75 crore Mumbai house purchase; Bombay High Court gives relief to wife
• Delhi High Court final judgement: Annulment of marriage
• Delhi High Court said that they of the view that the argument that his Shaadi.com profile was created by his parents, it cannot be contended that he was unaware of the contents of the same.
• Also read: Income Tax Department finds Rs 5 crore cash in his house; Know how a 2008 circular saved him from prosecution
• Delhi High Court said:
• The Appellant (husband) has corresponded using the chat option provided for in the Portal and would certainly have ample opportunity to view, and if required, review the details set out therein. The Appellant has chosen to never do so.
• We also take judicial notice of the fact that online matrimonial portals have, as an option, when it comes to marital status, “Divorced” as one of the options. There was clearly no correction made to the profile at any time before the marriage took place and, as is manifest, no attempt was made on the part of the Appellant (husband), to clarify or reveal the exact status post the marriage.
• The Appellant’s (husband) profile deliberately held out that the Appellant had been “Never Married” and would therefore, constitute “….a material fact or circumstance”, the concealment of which would fall foul of the provisions of the Statute.
• Also read: He got Rs 89 lakh as gift from relatives; Tax dept doubted its genuineness, but ITAT Mumbai ruled in his favour: Here’s whyJudgement: “In view of the above facts, circumstances, and settled principles of law, we find no merit in the present Appeal. There is no infirmity in the Impugned Judgment warranting interference. The Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. The present appeal, along with pending application(s), if any, is disposed of in the above terms.”
• Also read: Father sells house worth Rs 67 lakh and shows only Rs 1,690 income in ITR, wins case in ITAT Ahmedabad; Know how
• Delhi High Court applied Jasbeer v. Nishta Dawar’s case precedent in this case
• Delhi High Court said that they have in Jasbeer v. Nishta Dawar case , while adverting to the judgment of the Madras High Court in Sujatha v. Hariharan , made some significant observations which have been applied to the present case
• Also read: No income tax for son who sold late mother’s flat for Rs 1.45 crore to buy seven houses; how a minor language error helped him
• Delhi High Court said:
• “Applying these principles to the present case, the deliberate misrepresentation of one’s marital history is not a trivial omission but a clear suppression of facts going to the root of a marriage. This was a detail that the Respondent (wife) was entitled to know before making the life-altering decision to marry the Appellant (husband).
• Its concealment strikes at the very core of free and informed consent, rendering the marriage voidable under Section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
• What is the difference between annulment and divorce of marriage?
• Soayib Qureshi, Partner, PSL Advocates & Solicitors, says that Annulment and divorce are not the same. Qureshi says that divorce dissolves a valid marriage, acknowledging its existence but legally ending it. Annulment, on the other hand, declares that the marriage was voidable from the beginning due to fraud, misrepresentation, or other statutory grounds, treating it as if it never legally existed and wiping out the legal status of the union altogether.
• Anadi Mishra, Advocate, Delhi High Court, says that the Court also highlighted the distinction between annulment and divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act. Mishra says that a Divorce is granted when a valid marriage has come into existence but subsequently breaks down on recognised grounds such as cruelty, desertion or irretrievable breakdown. The decree of divorce dissolves the marriage from the date of the court’s order, until that point, the marriage is legally recognised. On the other hand, annulment under Section 12(1)(c), operates very differently, it is granted when consent itself is vitiated, as it was obtained by fraud or concealment of material facts. Once annulled, the marriage is treated as if it never existed in the eyes of law and the legal status of husband and wife is nullified from the very inception.