New Delhi: Music composer Anirudh Ravichander and Sunrisers Hyderabad CEO Kaviya Maran's wedding in Greece has brought attention to a form of marriage rooted in Tamil Nadu's social reform movement, the self-respect marriage. The couple tied the knot on November 11, 2026, in the presence of family members and prominent guests. Their wedding ceremony, marked by an exchange of garlands and chains rather than elaborate conventional Hindu rituals, has prompted questions about the tradition and its legal recognition in India.
The nature of the ceremony was subsequently confirmed by Dr TRB Rajaa, DMK’s IT Wing Secretary, who responded to speculation on social media. In a post on The union was blessed by family members and friends, he said.
The ceremony has also brought Section 7A of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, into focus. The provision, introduced through a Tamil Nadu state amendment, gives legal recognition to self-respect marriages conducted without the customary religious ceremonies associated with conventional Hindu weddings.
What Is A Self-Respect Marriage? Roots In Periyar’s Social Reform Movement
A self-respect marriage, also known as Suyamariyathai Thirumanam or Seerthiruththa Thirumanam, emerged from the Self-Respect Movement launched by social reformer Periyar EV Ramasamy in 1925. The movement sought to challenge caste-based discrimination, social hierarchies, patriarchal customs and the dominance of religious authority in social institutions. It advocated individual dignity, equality between partners and freedom from practices that reinforced social inequality.
Marriage was among the institutions the movement sought to reform. A self-respect ceremony places the consent and equal standing of the two individuals at its center, dispensing with the requirement of a priest or elaborate religious rites.
Under this form of marriage, the couple can solemnise their union through a declaration of acceptance, exchange of garlands or rings, or tying of the thali, in the presence of relatives, friends or other persons.
Section 7A Of Hindu Marriage Act: No Priest, Sacred Fire Or Saptapadi Required
Section 7A of the Hindu Marriage Act was introduced through the Hindu Marriage (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 1967. It provides a special statutory framework for suyamariyathai and seerthiruththa marriages between two Hindus.
Ashima Mandla, Advocate-on-Record at the Supreme Court, explained that the provision recognizes a marriage solemnised in the presence of relatives, friends or other persons through a simple ceremony.
Under Section 7A, the parties may declare that they accept each other as husband and wife, exchange garlands or rings, or solemnise the marriage by tying the thali. The provision does not insist on the presence of a priest, performance of rituals before a sacred fire or saptapadi (the customary seven steps around the sacred fire).
The statutory provision, therefore, recognizes a form of marriage in which mutual consent and a simple ceremony can fulfill the requirements for solemnisation, subject to the other conditions prescribed under the Hindu Marriage Act.
Supreme Court Has Upheld Validity Of Self-Respect Marriages
The Supreme Court has previously examined and upheld the constitutional and legal validity of Section 7A. In S. Nagalingam v. Sivagami (2001), the Court recognized that a valid marriage under Section 7A does not require the presence of a priest. It held that the exchange of garlands, rings or tying of the thali, in the presence of relatives, friends or other persons, could constitute sufficient solemnisation under the provision.
The issue came before the Supreme Court again in Ilavarasan v. Superintendent of Police (2023). The Court reiterated the legal position under Section 7A and clarified that a self-respect marriage needs not be conducted through a public declaration or elaborate ceremonial arrangements. Mandla referred to these decisions to explain that the statutory framework does not make conventional religious rites indispensable for a marriage covered by Section 7A.
Does Section 7A Apply To A Self-Respect Marriage Solemnised Abroad?
The geographical aspect of Anirudh and Kaviya's wedding raises a distinct legal question: whether a self-respect marriage conducted outside India can automatically claim recognition under Section 7A. Mandla explained that Section 7A is a state-specific amendment applicable in Tamil Nadu, while Puducherry has a similar legal provision.
In the case of a ceremony performed overseas, two separate considerations arise whether the marriage is recognized under the law of the country where it was solemnised and whether the Indian legal framework governing the couple's matrimonial status recognizes it.
The lawyer said there is a reasonable legal argument that the Hindu Marriage Act can apply to Hindus domiciled in India even when they are residing outside the country. However, she noted that she was not aware of any judicial decision specifically determining the validity of a self-respect marriage solemnised abroad. She also pointed out that registration under the Foreign Marriage Act is available where the marriage satisfies the requirements of the applicable local law.
Why Registration In India May Be Advisable
Although the ceremony may satisfy the substantive principles of a self-respect marriage, documentary proof of marital status remains important, particularly when the marriage is solemnised outside India.
Mandla suggested that the couple could consider registration in India under the Tamil Nadu Registration of Marriages Act or the Special Marriage Act to avoid potential disputes over proof or recognition of their marital status. Such documentation may assume significance in matters involving passports, inheritance and succession, among other legal and administrative requirements.
The distinction, therefore, is between the recognition of self-respect marriages under Tamil Nadu law and the additional legal questions that arise when such a ceremony takes place overseas. While the Supreme Court has upheld the validity of marriages under Section 7A, the specific issue of its application to a self-respect wedding conducted abroad remains an unsettled legal question, according to the lawyer.