Bhuvana Marni
Published on: 31 October 2022 at 11:58 IST
The Karnataka High Court rejected a recent bail plea of a man who married a minor Muslim girl, the argument that a minor Muslim girl’s marriage upon attaining puberty (15 years of age) will not contravene The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2005.
The Single bench Justice Rajendra Badamikar stated that the POCSO Act is a Special Act that overrides personal law, and the age for engaging in sexual activities under this act is 18 years old.
This ruling follows the Punjab and Haryana High Court‘s recent declaration that Muslim women 15 years old and older can marry any person of their own free will and consent, and such a marriage is not void under Section 12 of the 2006 law prohibiting child marriage.
Essentially, the accused in this case was booked for the offences punishable under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act as well as Sections 9 and 10 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, because he had married and impregnated a young Muslim girl.
On June 16, 2022, the victim—the accused’s wife—went to the Primary Health Centre for a checkup, and it was discovered during the examination that she was pregnant. This is how the case came to light. She was also just about 17 years old, it is further revealed. As a result, the K.R.Puram Police Station Sub-Inspector of Police lodged a complaint against the petitioner.
To obtain bail, his attorney argued before the High Court that since the girl had reached puberty in the current case there had been no violation of Sections 9 and 10 of the Child Marriage Restrain Act because under Mohammedan Law, puberty is the consideration for marriage and the normal puberty age is considered to be 15 years.
The Court rejected the argument, stating that the POCSO Act supersedes personal law and that the age for engaging in sexual activities is 18 years old.
The victim was around 17 years old and able to comprehend what was going on, therefore the court noted that even if she was under her parents’ control, it was prima-facie obvious that she was also a willing participant because there was no evidence that she voiced any opposition to the marriage.
“Admittedly, the petitioner is the husband of the victim and looking at these facts and circumstances, there is no serious dispute regarding the marriage as the petitioner himself has produced the relevant documents before the Trial,” the Court further added is it granted bail to the accused on his executing a personal bond for a sum of 1 lakh.
In related news, the Supreme Court recently gave notice of a petition filed by the National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) contesting a recent ruling of the Punjab and Haryana High Court that found that a Muslim girl can engage in a lawful marriage at the age of 16.
The NCPCR’s petition challenges the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s ruling that a Muslim girl can enter into a valid marriage at 16, and the NCPCR wants the Supreme Court to review the issue of whether a minor Muslim.