Today, On 18th October, CJI D.Y. Chandrachud asserted that child marriage prevention laws are not subject to personal or religious laws. He stressed the importance of safeguarding children’s rights and ensuring uniform application of laws prohibiting child marriage. The ruling highlights the primacy of protecting minors over traditional customs.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court ruled on Friday that the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act cannot be hindered by personal laws, asserting that marriages involving minors infringe upon their right to freely choose a life partner.
A bench led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, along with Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, issued several directives to ensure the effective enforcement of child marriage prevention laws across the country. Delivering the verdict, the Chief Justice emphasized that personal laws cannot override the legal provisions preventing child marriages. Such unions, the court stated, violate minors’ autonomy in choosing their partners.
The court highlighted that authorities should prioritize the prevention of child marriages and the protection of minors, with penalties for offenders being used only as a last resort. It also pointed out existing gaps in the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act.
Read Also: [Child Marriage Case] High Court Orders Legal Action Against The Priest Involved
The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, enacted to prevent child marriages and eliminate them from society, replacing the Child Marriage Restraint Act of 1929.
The bench emphasized,
“Preventive strategies should be tailored to different communities, and the law will only succeed with multi-sectoral coordination.”
It further stressed the need for “training and capacity building of law enforcement officers” and highlighted the importance of “community-driven approaches” for the law’s effective implementation.
After reserving judgment in this case, the court indicated it might rule that the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act (PCMA) takes precedence over personal laws. However, neither party provided specific details on conflicting opinions in their submissions. Notably, the PCMA does not explicitly address the validity of the marriages in question.
The Prohibition of Child Marriage (Amendment) Bill, 2021, introduced in Parliament on December 21, 2021. It was referred to the Department-Related Standing Committee on Education, Women, Children, Youth, and Sports for review. The bill seeks to amend the PCMA to clearly establish its supremacy over various personal laws, an issue that is still under parliamentary consideration.
Additionally, while the PCMA aims to prevent child marriages, it does not cover marriages that take place during a child’s minority. Such marriages violate children’s rights to free choice, autonomy, agency, and their childhood. They deny minors the opportunity to choose their partners and shape their own futures before they are mature enough to exercise their autonomy. International frameworks, like the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), align with these principles.
The judgment mandates measures against the betrothal of minors and urges Parliament to consider banning such practices. This may include the imposition of penalties under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act (PCMA), while recognizing that a minor engaged in a betrothal could be classified as a child in need of care and protection under the Juvenile Justice Act. Implementing specific remedies is crucial to eradicating this practice.
A copy of the judgment will be forwarded to the secretaries of all relevant ministries of the Government of India, including the Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Women and Child Development, Ministry of Panchayati Raj, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, and the Ministry of Rural Development. This also extends to statutory bodies, authorities, and organizations under the purview of these ministries.
The Ministry of Women and Child Development is instructed to disseminate the judgment to administrators across all states and union territories, as well as to NALSA and the National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights, ensuring strict adherence to the directives. These actions are to be completed within four weeks from the date the judgment is issued, after which the petitions will be disposed of.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
