By Express News Service
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to consider whether young girls over 16 years of age can marry once she attains puberty on the basis of custom or personal law when such marriages constitute an offence under the penal code such as IPC.
A bench of CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha also directed for not treating as precedent recent observations of Punjab and Haryana HC that a 16-year-old Muslim girl can enter into valid marriage after attaining puberty irrespective of POCSO.
The order was passed in a batch of pleas by NCPCR challenging a Punjab and Haryana HC’s ruling which held 16-year-old Muslim girl can enter into valid marriage after attaining puberty.
The HC had also observed that “Petitioner No.2 being over 16 years of age was competent to enter into a contract of marriage with a person of her choice. Petitioner No.1 is stated to be more than 21 years of age. Thus, both the petitioners are of marriageable age as envisaged by Muslim Personal Law. In any event, the issue in hand is not with regard to the validity of the marriage but to address the apprehension raised by the petitioners of danger to their life and liberty at the hands of the private respondents and to provide them protection as envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
Apprising the bench of the issue which was required to be considered, SG Tushar Mehta for the apex child rights body said, “The question is can you plead custom of personal law as a defence to a criminal offence?” Contending that other HCs might also cite Punjab & Haryana HCs’ observations, SG also sought for a stay of the observations.
Considering SGs submissions, CJI DY Chandrachud said, “What will happen is, the moment we grant a stay- she may be restored to her parents. We’ll issue notice and we will say that in meantime the judgment will not be cited.”
Accordingly, the bench in their order said, “We are inclined to entertain the plea. Issue notice to the respondent. Pending further orders, HCs judgement shall not be relied upon in any other case.”
Earlier, a bench of Justices SK Kaul and AS Oka also appointed Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao as an amicus. It had also refused to accede to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s request for staying HC’s observation on the ground that other HCs may consider by remarking as to how would it be followed by other HCs when SC was seized of the issue.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to consider whether young girls over 16 years of age can marry once she attains puberty on the basis of custom or personal law when such marriages constitute an offence under the penal code such as IPC.
A bench of CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha also directed for not treating as precedent recent observations of Punjab and Haryana HC that a 16-year-old Muslim girl can enter into valid marriage after attaining puberty irrespective of POCSO.
The order was passed in a batch of pleas by NCPCR challenging a Punjab and Haryana HC’s ruling which held 16-year-old Muslim girl can enter into valid marriage after attaining puberty.
The HC had also observed that “Petitioner No.2 being over 16 years of age was competent to enter into a contract of marriage with a person of her choice. Petitioner No.1 is stated to be more than 21 years of age. Thus, both the petitioners are of marriageable age as envisaged by Muslim Personal Law. In any event, the issue in hand is not with regard to the validity of the marriage but to address the apprehension raised by the petitioners of danger to their life and liberty at the hands of the private respondents and to provide them protection as envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
Apprising the bench of the issue which was required to be considered, SG Tushar Mehta for the apex child rights body said, “The question is can you plead custom of personal law as a defence to a criminal offence?” Contending that other HCs might also cite Punjab & Haryana HCs’ observations, SG also sought for a stay of the observations.
Considering SGs submissions, CJI DY Chandrachud said, “What will happen is, the moment we grant a stay- she may be restored to her parents. We’ll issue notice and we will say that in meantime the judgment will not be cited.”
Accordingly, the bench in their order said, “We are inclined to entertain the plea. Issue notice to the respondent. Pending further orders, HCs judgement shall not be relied upon in any other case.”
Earlier, a bench of Justices SK Kaul and AS Oka also appointed Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao as an amicus. It had also refused to accede to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s request for staying HC’s observation on the ground that other HCs may consider by remarking as to how would it be followed by other HCs when SC was seized of the issue.
