‘Right to life on higher pedestal’: Court protects couple despite groom being below 21

The court directed the couple to register their marriage within two months under the U.P. Marriage Registration Rules, 2017, failing which the protection granted by the order would automatically cease.

Justice Dr Gautam Chowdhary permitted the couple to live together. (Image generated using AI)

Plea for protection

The counsel appearing on behalf of the couple submitted that the woman was aged about 23 years, as her date of birth recorded in the Aadhar card and the man was aged about 20 years.

It was further submitted that although the husband was a major, he had not attained the marriageable age as prescribed under the Hindu Marriage Act.

The counsel further informed the court that the woman had conceived and that their family members have got annoyed therefore there was serious danger to their lives as they were being threatened and harassed.

The State opposed the petition, contending that since the husband had not attained the marriageable age prescribed under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the marriage was void under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, and therefore prayed for the dismissal of the plea.

Court comes to the aid

The court noted that Section 12 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 declares a child marriage void in circumstances such as kidnapping, force, deceit, trafficking or sale of the minor, none of which were alleged in the present case.

The court further observed that the girl being a major and there being no complaint by the guardian of the boy, the objections raised by the counsel for the state was misconceived and premature.

It noted that the issue before the court was not the validity of the marriage but the protection of the couple’s fundamental rights.

“As already noted, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the validity of the marriage at this stage, I am of the view that what needs to be addressed is the apprehension of the petitioners based on threat to their life and liberty for the reasons/circumstances as narrated in the petition,” the order read.

The court observed that the constitutional fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India stands on a much higher pedestal.

“Being sacrosanct under the Constitutional Scheme it must be protected, regardless of the solemnisation of an invalid or void marriage or even the absence of any marriage between the parties,” the court noted.

The court permitted the petitioners to live together as a married couple and directed that if they face any disturbance, they may approach the Senior Superintendent of Police or Superintendent of Police concerned, who must examine the complaint and provide immediate protection.

The court clarified that it has not adjudicated on the validity of the marriage and/or genuineness of their marriage certificate claimed by the petitioners or the correct age of the petitioners.

It further clarified that the order has not been passed to protect the petitioners against any action or proceedings instituted in accordance with law.