Child Marriage Prevention Act secular in nature: HC

Image
Press Trust of India Madurai
Last Updated : Mar 05 2015 | 6:48 PM IST
The Madras High court bench here today ruled that Child Marriage Prevention Act was secular in nature and Muslims could not rely on their personal law to claim the right to give minor girls in marriage even at the age of 15 presuming that the girl had attained puberty.
Justice C.T.Selvam, dismissing an appeal against an order passed by the Perambalur Judicial Magistrate restraining the marriage of one Shahila Baanu, who was just 17 years old, said the objective of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act,2006 was to enhance the health of the children and woman in particular.
The Magistrate had confirmed the order passed by the District Child welfare officer preventing the family of Abdul Khader from solemnising the marriage of their daughter on November 23, 2012 when the girl was just 17 years old.
The judge said Prevention of Child Marriage Act "crossed all barriers of personal law irrespective of personal law. The marriage of a girl is prohibited until the age of 18."
With no government advocate appearing for the case, the judge took the help of Abudkumar Rajarathinam by appointing him as Amicus Curiae.
The judge rejected the contention that Child Marriage Prohibtion law was general in nature and not applicable to Muslims. Besides, in India, the uniform civil code had not been enacted, it was argued.
The judge also rejected the contention thar for a Muslim girl's marriage, only Muslim personal law could be applied and Shariat law made applicable for bride above 15 when the girl is presumed to attain puberty.
The judge also pointed out that there was growing demand among Indians to make the Prevention of Child Marriage Act more stringent and efficient to prevent and eradicate the evil practice of child marriage.
"The practice of child marriage runs counter to the social objective of the provisions of the act. As per the act the officials have power to prevent child marriage and also the courts."
Quoting various judgments, the judge also said "what is permissive under scriptures cannot be equated with mandate. Also religious practices are based on faith. But law is brought taking into consideration the social welfare, social justice, nation's interest, welfare of the people and other apsects.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Mar 05 2015 | 6:48 PM IST

Next Story