MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Supreme Court Empowers Magistrates to Take Suo Motu Action to Prevent Child Marriages

20 October 2024 2:14 PM

By: Deepak Kumar


Magistrates must proactively issue preventive injunctions to halt child marriages, especially during mass wedding ceremonies. In a landmark judgment on October 18, 2024, the Supreme Court of India empowered magistrates to take suo motu action to prevent child marriages under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act (PCMA), 2006. This ruling was part of a comprehensive set of guidelines issued in the case of Society for Enlightenment and Voluntary Action & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., where the Court addressed the urgent need to strengthen enforcement mechanisms against child marriages across the country.

"Magistrates should not wait for complaints; they are empowered to act on credible information or even suspicion to stop child marriages."

The Supreme Court directed all magistrates vested with authority under Section 13 of the PCMA to take proactive steps to prevent the solemnization of child marriages, including issuing suo motu injunctions when necessary. The Court emphasized that magistrates should focus particularly on "auspicious days," known for mass weddings, when the risk of child marriages is highest.

The suo motu empowerment allows magistrates to act independently, even without a formal complaint, to prevent imminent child marriages. This proactive approach aims to close the enforcement gap, ensuring that judicial authorities can intervene before the marriage takes place, rather than only addressing the issue after the fact.

The Court highlighted that child marriages often occur during public or mass wedding ceremonies, making it difficult for authorities to intervene in real-time. By granting magistrates the power to issue preventive injunctions, the Court aims to ensure immediate action is taken to stop such ceremonies from proceeding. This directive reinforces the role of the judiciary in preventing harm before it occurs, aligning with the Court's broader objective of shifting focus from penalizing to preventing child marriages.

"Magistrates must be particularly vigilant during mass weddings, using their judicial powers to issue preventive orders and protect children's rights."

The Supreme Court’s ruling empowering magistrates to take suo motu action is a major step towards ensuring stricter enforcement of child marriage laws in India. This proactive judicial measure is designed to prevent marriages before they occur, reinforcing the legal protection for children and furthering the country’s commitment to ending child marriage.

 

Date of Decision:October 18, 2024.

Society for Enlightenment and Voluntary Action & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Latest Legal News