Victim Has Locus To Request Court To Summon Witnesses Under Section 311 CrPC In State Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Order 2 Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Ground to Reject a Plaint: Supreme Court Draws Crucial Distinction Between Bar to Sue and Bar by Law No Right to Lawyer Before Advisory Board in Preventive Detention — Unless Government Appears Through Legal Practitioner: Supreme Court Wife's Dowry Statement Cannot Be Used to Prosecute Her for 'Giving' Dowry: Supreme Court Upholds Section 7(3) Shield Husband's Loan Repayments Cannot Reduce Wife's Maintenance: Supreme Court Raises Amount to ₹25,000 From ₹15,000 Prisoners Don't Surrender Their Rights at the Prison Gate: Supreme Court Issues Binding SOP to End Delays in Legal Aid Appeals A Judgment Must Be a Self-Contained Document Even When Defendant Never Appears: Supreme Court on Ex Parte Decrees Court Cannot Dismiss Ex Parte Suit on Unpleaded, Unframed Issue: Supreme Court Sets Aside Specific Performance Decree Denied on Title Erroneous High Court Observations Cannot Be Used to Stake Property Claims: Supreme Court Steps In to Prevent Misuse of Judicial Observations No Criminal Proceedings Would Have Been Initiated Had Financial Settlement Succeeded: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail In Rape Case Directors Cannot Escape Pollution Law Prosecution by Claiming Ignorance: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Summons Against Company Directors Order 7 Rule 11 CPC | Court Cannot Peek Into Defence While Rejecting Plaint: Delhi High Court Death 3½ Months After Accident Doesn't Break Causal Link If Doctors Testify Injuries Could Cause Death: Andhra Pradesh High Court LLB Intern Posed as Supreme Court Advocate, Used Fake Bar Council Card and Police Station Seals to Defraud Victims of Rs. 80 Lakhs: Gujarat High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail Husband Who Travels to Wife's City on Leave, Cohabits With Her, Then Claims She 'Never Lived With Him' Cannot Prove Cruelty: Jharkhand High Court Liquor Licence Is a State Privilege, Not a Citizen's Right — No Vested Right of Renewal Survives a Change in Rules: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Stay on E-Auction Policy Court Holiday Cannot Save Prosecution From Default Bail: MP High Court No Search At Your Premises, No Incriminating Document, No Case: Rajasthan HC Quashes Rs. 18 Crore Tax Assessment Under Section 153C Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court

Child Marriages Voidable, Not Void: Can Not Be Compelled to Live With Husband: Patna High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling on the status of child marriages in India, the High Court of Patna declared that child marriages are voidable and not void, emphasizing the paramount importance of child welfare and legal majority. This landmark decision was delivered on 16th January 2024 by the bench comprising Honourable Mr. Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya and Honourable Mr. Justice P. B. Bajanthri.

The court, in its judgment, stated, “A marriage contracted with a female of less than 18 years or a male of less than 21 years would not be a void marriage but a voidable one.” This observation came in the backdrop of a habeas corpus petition filed for the release of Shivani Kumari, a minor, from the State Girls Care Home in Patna.

The court denied the petition, upholding that a minor girl, even if married, cannot be compelled to live with her husband and must stay under the care of the State until she attains majority. The decision was rooted in the provisions of various legislations, including the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

Further elaborating on the subject, the court observed, “The welfare of a child is always of paramount consideration.” This statement underscores the court’s approach that prioritizes the overall well-being and rights of the child over the marital status or the consent given in a child marriage.

The case also highlighted the court’s commitment to the protection of children’s rights, with specific emphasis on the right of a child below 18 years of age to not give consent for marriage or sexual intercourse.

Date of Decision: 16-01-2024

NITISH KUMAR @ NITISH RAM VS The State of Bihar

 

Latest Legal News