Express News Service
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to think about whether or not younger ladies over 16 years of age can marry as soon as she attains puberty on the idea of customized or private legislation when such marriages represent an offence below the penal code reminiscent of IPC.
A bench of CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha additionally directed for not treating as precedent current observations of Punjab and Haryana HC {that a} 16-year-old Muslim woman can enter into legitimate marriage after attaining puberty regardless of POCSO.
The order was handed in a batch of pleas by NCPCR difficult a Punjab and Haryana HC’s ruling which held 16-year-old Muslim woman can enter into legitimate marriage after attaining puberty.
The HC had additionally noticed that “Petitioner No.2 being over 16 years of age was competent to enter into a contract of marriage with a person of her choice. Petitioner No.1 is stated to be more than 21 years of age. Thus, both the petitioners are of marriageable age as envisaged by Muslim Personal Law. In any event, the issue in hand is not with regard to the validity of the marriage but to address the apprehension raised by the petitioners of danger to their life and liberty at the hands of the private respondents and to provide them protection as envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
Apprising the bench of the problem which was required to be thought-about, SG Tushar Mehta for the apex little one rights physique mentioned, “The question is can you plead custom of personal law as a defence to a criminal offence?” Contending that different HCs may also cite Punjab & Haryana HCs’ observations, SG additionally searched for a keep of the observations.
Considering SGs submissions, CJI DY Chandrachud mentioned, “What will happen is, the moment we grant a stay- she may be restored to her parents. We’ll issue notice and we will say that in meantime the judgment will not be cited.”
Accordingly, the bench of their order mentioned, “We are inclined to entertain the plea. Issue notice to the respondent. Pending further orders, HCs judgement shall not be relied upon in any other case.”
Earlier, a bench of Justices SK Kaul and AS Oka additionally appointed Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao as an amicus. It had additionally refused to accede to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s request for staying HC’s remark on the bottom that different HCs might think about by remarking as to how wouldn’t it be adopted by different HCs when SC was seized of the problem.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to think about whether or not younger ladies over 16 years of age can marry as soon as she attains puberty on the idea of customized or private legislation when such marriages represent an offence below the penal code reminiscent of IPC.
A bench of CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha additionally directed for not treating as precedent current observations of Punjab and Haryana HC {that a} 16-year-old Muslim woman can enter into legitimate marriage after attaining puberty regardless of POCSO.
The order was handed in a batch of pleas by NCPCR difficult a Punjab and Haryana HC’s ruling which held 16-year-old Muslim woman can enter into legitimate marriage after attaining puberty.
The HC had additionally noticed that “Petitioner No.2 being over 16 years of age was competent to enter into a contract of marriage with a person of her choice. Petitioner No.1 is stated to be more than 21 years of age. Thus, both the petitioners are of marriageable age as envisaged by Muslim Personal Law. In any event, the issue in hand is not with regard to the validity of the marriage but to address the apprehension raised by the petitioners of danger to their life and liberty at the hands of the private respondents and to provide them protection as envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
Apprising the bench of the problem which was required to be thought-about, SG Tushar Mehta for the apex little one rights physique mentioned, “The question is can you plead custom of personal law as a defence to a criminal offence?” Contending that different HCs may also cite Punjab & Haryana HCs’ observations, SG additionally searched for a keep of the observations.
Considering SGs submissions, CJI DY Chandrachud mentioned, “What will happen is, the moment we grant a stay- she may be restored to her parents. We’ll issue notice and we will say that in meantime the judgment will not be cited.”
Accordingly, the bench of their order mentioned, “We are inclined to entertain the plea. Issue notice to the respondent. Pending further orders, HCs judgement shall not be relied upon in any other case.”
Earlier, a bench of Justices SK Kaul and AS Oka additionally appointed Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao as an amicus. It had additionally refused to accede to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s request for staying HC’s remark on the bottom that different HCs might think about by remarking as to how wouldn’t it be adopted by different HCs when SC was seized of the problem.
