When Police Search Both The Bag And The Body, Section 50 NDPS Cannot Be Bypassed: Supreme Court Settles The Boundaries Of A Critical Safeguard Police Cannot Offer A Third Option During NDPS Search: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal In 11 Kg Charas Case, Holds Section 50 Violation Vitiates Entire Trial Supreme Court Holds Employer Group Insurance Has No Connection With Accidental Death, Cannot Be Set Off Against Motor Accident Compensation Graduating Shouldn't Be A Punishment: Supreme Court Restores Rights Of Anganwadi Workers Denied Supervisor Posts For Being Over-Qualified Trustee Who Diverts Sale Proceeds of Charitable Trust Is an 'Agent' Under Section 409 IPC, Not Exempt From Criminal Breach of Trust: Bombay High Court AFGIS Is 'State' Under Article 12: Supreme Court Reverses Delhi High Court, Restores Writ Petitions of Air Force Insurance Society Employees Delhi High Court Issues Landmark Directions Against Repeated Summoning of Child Victims, Insistence on Presence During Bail Hearings In POCSO 'Accidental Injury' in Hospital Records, All Eye-Witnesses Hostile: Gujarat High Court Acquits Men Convicted for Culpable Homicide After 35 Years Medical Condition Alone Cannot Dilute the Statutory Embargo Under Section 37 NDPS Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Pre-emption Cannot Wait for Registration When Possession Has Already Changed Hands: Punjab & Haryana High Court Strikes Down Time-Barred Claim Listing a Case for Evidence Is Not Commencement of Trial: Madhya Pradesh High Court Allows Amendment of Plaint in Insurance Dispute Forgery Accused Cannot Be Declared 'Proclaimed Offender': Punjab and Haryana High Court Draws Critical Distinction Between 'Proclaimed Person' and 'Proclaimed Offender' A Two-Line Ex Parte Judgment Is No Judgment In The Eye Of Law: Madras High Court Declares Decree Inexecutable What Was Not Claimed Then Cannot Be Claimed Now: Calcutta High Court Applies Constructive Res Judicata to Bar Second Partition Suit Unregistered Family Settlement Creates No Rights in Immovable Property: Delhi High Court Rejects Brother's Ownership Claim Police Must Protect Lawful Possession When Civil Court Decree Is Defied: Kerala High Court Upholds Purchase Certificate Holder’s Rights Over Alleged Temple Claim One Mark Short, No Right to Appointment: Patna High Court Dismisses Engineer's Claim to Vacancies Left by Non-Joining Candidates Bombay High Court Binds MCA to Arbitration as "Veritable Party" in T20 League Dispute Silence in the Witness Box Can Sink Your Case: ‘Non-Examination Leads to Presumption Against Party’ — Andhra Pradesh High Court Sale Deed Holder With Registered Title Prevails Over Claimant Under Mere Agreement To Sell: Karnataka High Court Candidate With 'Third Child' Disqualification Cannot Escape Consequence By Avoiding Cross-Examination: Supreme Court

Minor’s Right to Choose: High Court Orders Protection for Girl Refusing Arranged Marriage

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Justice Manisha Batra directs police and Child Welfare Committee to ensure the safety and rights of Harmanpreet Kaur against family threats.

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana has issued a significant judgment under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, ensuring the protection of a minor girl, Harmanpreet Kaur, who faced threats from her family after refusing an arranged marriage. Justice Manisha Batra’s decision mandates police intervention and Child Welfare Committee oversight to safeguard the minor’s life and liberty.

Harmanpreet Kaur, represented by family friends, sought the court’s intervention under Article 226, following threats and physical violence from her family after she refused to marry an elderly man. Evicted from her home, she sought refuge with family friends. Despite her representation to the police on June 11, 2024, no action was taken, prompting her to approach the High Court.

Justice Batra highlighted the fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantee the protection of life and liberty. The court noted the urgent need to safeguard Harmanpreet from coercion and physical harm due to her refusal of an arranged marriage.

The judgment emphasized the critical role of the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The court directed that Harmanpreet be produced before the CWC to ensure her safety and well-being. “The court, in its capacity as parens patriae, must act in the best interest of the minor,” Justice Batra stated.

Justice Batra reiterated the importance of considering the minor’s representation to the police, underscoring that the threat to her life and liberty should not be ignored. The court cited similar cases where minors sought protection from familial threats after exercising their freedom of choice in matters of marriage.

The judgment reinforced the legal obligation of the state to protect individuals, especially minors, from threats to their life and liberty. The court drew parallels with previous cases, emphasizing that the police must act on credible threats and provide necessary protection.

Justice Manisha Batra remarked, “No person can be permitted or allowed to take law into their hands, and therefore, keeping in view the said aspect, the protection must be provided as permissible in law.” She further noted, “The court must ensure that the minor’s rights are safeguarded in compliance with the Juvenile Justice Act.”

The High Court’s decision mandates the Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar, to assess the threat perception and provide protection if necessary. The Child Welfare Committee is instructed to ensure the minor’s safety and submit a compliance report within two months. This landmark judgment underscores the judiciary’s commitment to protecting minors’ rights and upholding their autonomy against coercive practices.

 

Date of Decision: 3rd July, 2024

Harmanpreet Kaur through Swarn Kaur and Anr. Vs. State of Punjab and Others

Latest Legal News