The Delhi High Court has ruled that a marriage considered valid under Muslim personal law does not grant immunity from criminal prosecution for establishing sexual relations with a minor wife. Dismissing a plea to quash criminal proceedings against a 28-year-old man, the court held that statutory safeguards designed to protect children from sexual offenses supersede personal laws.
Justice Sanjeev Narula, in an order dated September 23, affirmed that accepting a personal law marriage as a legal shield would severely weaken the framework of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The bench noted that allowing such an exception would make the protection of minors contingent on whether a wedding took place before a sexual relationship was discovered, subverting the core objective of the legislation.
No Judicial Exemption Under POCSO Framework
The court highlighted that Parliament consciously chose not to incorporate a marital exception within POCSO for minors. To terminate criminal proceedings solely because the individuals considered themselves married and the minor supported her spouse would amount to judicially creating an exception that lawmakers expressly excluded.
Justice Narula explained that a marriage ceremony does not alter an individual’s chronological age, pointing out that an individual who is 16 years old prior to a wedding ceremony remains the same age afterward. The court emphasised that personal law cannot dilute the statutory mandate established to shield minors from sexual acts.
Civil Recognition Distinct From Criminal Liability
The bench drew a clear line between the civil validity of a marriage and the criminal liability arising from sexual relations with a child. Even if the union was presumed to be valid under Muslim personal law, the court held that such status cannot confer immunity from either the POCSO Act or the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for sexual acts involving a spouse under the age of 18.
The ruling came on a petition filed jointly by the man and the minor, who argued that Muslim personal law considers a girl competent to marry once she attains puberty. On that basis, the petitioners contended that the validity of their union negated any criminal liability for subsequent physical relations.
Hospital Discovery And Background Of The Case
The legal proceedings originated after the couple married when the girl was 16 years and three months old, while the man was 28. The two lived together, and the girl subsequently conceived. Her minor age came to light when she visited a government hospital for antenatal medical attention, after which hospital authorities reported the situation to the police, resulting in an FIR under POCSO.
Records before the court also indicated that the girl delivered a stillborn child in June.
Minor’s Consent Does Not Negate Statutory Offence
During the proceedings, the girl maintained that the marriage was conducted with the mutual consent of both families and was entirely free from force or coercion. She had previously supported her husband’s bail application, expressing a desire for his presence during her pregnancy, and reiterated before the high court that she did not consider herself a victim of any wrongdoing.
Addressing her submissions, Justice Narula stated that while the girl’s perspective warranted serious and dignified consideration, and could be accepted as voluntary, her consent could not alter the legal outcome. The court concluded that neither her consent given before turning 18 nor the solemnisation of a nikah could exempt the case from the purview of POCSO and the BNS.
