Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Collector’s Appointment of Ex-Serviceman as Lambardar: Preference for Service to the State Valid Tax to Be Computed at 100% Under DTVSV Act, Rejects Inclusion of Belated Grounds in Disputed Tax: Bombay High Court Petitioner’s Father Did Not Fall Within Definition of Enemy – Kerala High Court Quashes Land Classification Under Enemy Property Act Calcutta High Court Upholds Cancellation of LPG Distributor LOI for Violating Guidelines Recording 'Reasons to Believe' is a Mandatory Safeguard, Not a Mere Formality Under PMLA: P&H High Court Illegality Is Incurable, Unauthorized Constructions Cannot Be Regularized: Bombay High Court Kerala High Court Quashes Tribunal’s Order Granting Retrospective UGC Benefits to Librarians Without Required Qualifications Order XLI Rule 27 CPC | No Evidence Can Be Admitted Beyond Pleadings, And Additional Evidence Cannot Be Allowed Merely To Fill Lacunae: Jharkhand High Court Quashing | Mere Heated Exchanges Over Loan Repayment Do Not Constitute Abetment of Suicide: Supreme Court Prisoner Transfers Must Prioritize Security and Prevent Gang Violence: Supreme Court Restores Intra-State Transfer Order Jurisdiction Under Section 100 CPC Is Conditional Upon Framing Substantial Questions of Law: Supreme Court Panchayat Election | Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Bar on Judicial Review During Election Process Encroachment Allegation Requires Concrete Evidence, Not Mere Surmises: Bombay High Court Dismisses Plea for Disqualification of Sarpanch Order Denying Permission for Peaceful Protest Rally Set Aside: Calcutta High Court Prolonged Custody Alone Cannot Justify Bail In Cases Involving Heinous Crimes: Delhi High Court Body Shaming and Sexually Colored Remarks Are Unacceptable In A Civilized Society: Kerala High Court No Mandatory Injunction Where Failure to Prove Ownership and Possession: Punjab and Haryana High Court Supreme Court Dismisses Article 32 Petition Seeking Declaration of Bombay High Court Judgment as Illegal Specific Relief Act | Power to Extend Time Under Section 28 Is Discretionary and Must Be Exercised Prudently: Supreme Court

Personal Liberty in Valid Muslim Marriage: High Court Asserts Age of Majority 15 Years

05 September 2024 6:15 AM

By: Admin


Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a resounding affirmation of personal liberty and the validity of a Muslim marriage contracted by individuals above the age of puberty. The decision, handed down on December 13, 2023, by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA, has far-reaching implications for cases involving the protection of personal freedom and the competence of Muslim individuals to enter into marriages of their choice.

The case, CRWP-11190-2023, revolved around Shameem and Salma, both Muslims by religion. The petitioners, aged 23 and more than 16 years old, respectively, entered into a matrimonial bond against the wishes of their families, performing a Muslim marriage ceremony on November 8, 2023. Fearing for their life and liberty, the couple approached the High Court, seeking protection from potential threats posed by family members who disapproved of their union.

On the other side, the parents of Salma filed a separate petition, CRWP-11123-2023, requesting a writ of habeas corpus to produce their minor daughter Salma from the custody of Shameem. They argued that Salma was a minor and had been abducted, leading to the registration of an FIR for kidnapping.

The central legal question in the case was whether Salma's marriage, performed above the age of 15, was valid under Muslim Personal Law and whether the couple should be granted protection.

Justice Deepak Gupta's judgment highlighted the importance of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. He stated, "The Court cannot shut its eyes to the fact that the apprehension of the petitioners needs to be addressed. Merely because the petitioners have got married against the wishes of their family members, they cannot possibly be deprived of the fundamental rights as envisaged in the Constitution of India."

The court relied on legal precedents, emphasizing that in Muslim law, puberty and majority are considered the same, with a presumption that a person attains majority at the age of 15 years. Therefore, the marriage between the petitioners was deemed valid.

The verdict concluded by granting custody of Salma to her husband, Shameem, asserting that the parents' wishes were inconsequential in this case. The court also directed the official respondents to provide necessary protection to the married couple as required.

Date of Decision: December 13, 2023

Iqbal and Another VS State of Haryana and Others

Similar News