-
by Admin
07 May 2024 2:49 AM
In a significant ruling, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has upheld the autonomy of a minor girl in a runaway marriage case, emphasizing the importance of respecting the minor's wishes in deciding custody issues. The Court, presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar, delivered a nuanced judgment that balances the legal frameworks with the evolving maturity and personal desires of minors.
The judgment meticulously navigates through the intricate legalities involving the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and other relevant statutes. The Court observed that the marriage, while not void ab initio under the Hindu Marriage Act due to non-compliance with age requirements, could be considered voidable at the instance of the minor under the Child Marriage Act. However, the court placed significant weight on the expressed desires of the minor.
Preeti (aged 16 years and 10 months) and Sahil (aged 18 years and 6 months), both minors under the law, eloped and married against the wishes of Preeti's parents. Facing threats from her family, the couple approached the court seeking protection and the right to live together. The primary legal challenges revolved around the validity of their marriage, the application of child protection laws, and the immediate welfare and custody of the minor girl.
Autonomy and Maturity of Minors: The Court recognized the enhanced maturity of minors today compared to earlier times, emphasizing that "By age 16, adolescents' general cognitive abilities are essentially indistinguishable from those of adults," thereby supporting the minor’s capability to make significant life decisions.
Legal Guardianship and Marriage Validity: While discussing guardianship, the Court noted that the marriage does not render it void but voidable, highlighting, "Marriage not void ab initio but voidable at the instance of the minor," thus acknowledging the legal complexities due to conflicting statutes.
Protection and Custody: The Court decided against sending Preeti back to her parents or to a state home, citing her firm resolve to stay with her husband’s family. "It would not be right and proper for this Court to brush aside her views on the ground that she is not 18 years of age," Justice Kumar remarked, underlining the importance of the minor’s expressed wishes over statutory age limits.
The Court directed that Preeti be entrusted to the care of her mother-in-law under the supervision of the Child Welfare Committee until she reaches the age of majority. This arrangement ensures her protection and welfare while respecting her personal choices and autonomy.
Date of Decision: October 16, 2020
Preeti and another v. State of Haryana and others
