The story so far: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that under Muslim personal law, a person who has attained puberty is presumed to be competent to marry a person of their choice.
The observation came while the court was hearing a petition filed by a Muslim couple seeking protection of their life and liberty after marrying against the wishes of the woman’s family. The judgment highlights an ongoing legal question concerning the interplay between personal laws and statutory child-protection frameworks, such as the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (PCMA) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, 2012 (POCSO) Act.
Under the PCMA, a “child” means a male who has not completed 21 years of age or a female who has not completed 18 years of age. A “child marriage” is a marriage to which either of the contracting parties is a child.
What happened in the current case?
Justice Vikram Aggarwal made the observation while dealing with a petition filed by a 26-year-old Muslim man and a 17-year-and-eight-month-old Muslim woman, who sought protection from the woman’s family. State of Karnataka (2022). The court noted that a person will be held guilty of penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act if the wife is under the age of 18, even if the sexual intercourse took place in the course of the marriage. The petitioner, who was seeking bail, argued that since the girl had reached puberty in the present case and that Mohammedan law treats reaching puberty as a consideration for marriage at the age of 15, there had been no violations. The high court strongly disagreed with this argument, stating that the POCSO Act overrides personal law and that the age for engaging in sexual activity is 18 years. 2026, the Allahabad High Court held that Muslim personal law recognising puberty as the age of marriage cannot override statutory provisions like the PCMA and the POCSO, which criminalise sexual relations with a child and provide protections to children. The court directed the Senior Superintendent of Police (Rural), Ludhiana, to consider the couple’s August 30 representation and take appropriate action, if required, in accordance with law.
The issue was considered again in Aleem Pasha v. In Rubi v. State of U.P . The petition was disposed of with these directions.
The Karnataka High Court observed that the POCSO Act is a special legislation to protect children from sexual offences and therefore, it will have an overriding effect on Muslim personal law.
The couple said they had performed nikah after the woman’s father opposed their relationship. The court also observed that “As per Muslim Personal Laws, a boy or girl who has attained the age of puberty, which happens to be 15 years, is at liberty to marry anyone of his or her liking”.
