W.P.(MD) No. 3133 of 2015. Case: M. Mohamed Abbas Vs The Chief Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu and Ors.. High Court of Madras (India)

Case NumberW.P.(MD) No. 3133 of 2015
CounselFor Appellant: W. Peter Ramesh Kumar, Advocate and For Respondents: K. Chellapandian, Additional Advocate General assisted by A.K. Baskarapandian, Special Government Pleader
JudgesS. Tamilvanan and V.S. Ravi, JJ.
IssueCode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 125; Constitution Of India - Articles 13(2), 13(3)(a), 14, 15, 15(1), 15(3), 16, 21, 25, 25(2), 26, 26(b), 29
CitationAIR 2015 Mad 237, 2015 (4) CTC 132, 2015 (6) MLJ 49, 2015 (3) RCR 1017 (Civil), 2015 WritLR 646
Judgement DateMarch 31, 2015
CourtHigh Court of Madras (India)

Judgment:

S. Tamilvanan, J., (Madurai Bench)

  1. This Writ Petition has been filed seeking an Order in the Nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other Order or direction, in the nature of Writ, forbearing the Respondents from in any way interfering with any marriage being solemnized as per the Muslim Personal Law, by invoking the provisions of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and the Rules made thereunder. This Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of Public Interest Litigation. The Miscellaneous Petition in M.P.(MD) No. 2 of 2015 was filed by the Writ Petitioner, seeking an Order to direct the Respondents 7 to 9 to produce Miss Aysha Banu, daughter of one Syed Abuthahir and set her at liberty, to the custody of her parents, stating that the minor girl, aged 16 years was taken by the officials of Social Welfare Department and kept in the Home, run by the 9th Respondent, on account of the marriage being arranged by her parents, against the provisions of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. Having considered the facts and circumstances, this Court, by Order dated 6.3.2015, had directed the Respondents to produce the minor girl Aysha Banu before this Court and accordingly, she was produced on 9.3.2015. There was no Complaint by the minor girl against the Authorities whatsoever especially in respect of providing food, shelter and the treatment in the home. While we enquired the minor girl, Aysha Banu, expressed her willingness to go along with her parents who were present before this Court. Having considered the willingness expressed by the girl and the Affidavit of Undertaking filed by her parents that they would not perform her marriage until final Orders being passed in the main Writ Petition, against the provisions of the Act, we permitted the girl to go along with her parents.

  2. Mr. W. Peter Ramesh Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submitted that Muslims are governed by Mahomedan Law, being their Personal Law, so far as marriage, divorce and other matrimonial rights are concerned. According to him, a mohammedan girl is entitled to marry on attaining her puberty or after the age of 15 years, for which even the consent of her parents or guardian is not required. The Counsel for the Petitioner argued that invoking the provisions, pertaining to Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 is improper and illegal, so far as the Muslims are concerned. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the provisions of Child Marriage Act, 2006, stipulating minimum age limit as 18 years, so far as, any Muslim girl is concerned, to be void. It is seen that the relief sought for in this Writ Petition is not to declare the Act or any provision of the Act as void or not applicable to any Muslim girl on the ground that the same is contrary to Shariat Law. In the Writ Petition, no declaratory relief is sought for. The Petitioner has filed the Writ Petition as 'Pro bono publico', seeking an Order in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ, forbearing the Respondents from interfering with any marriage being solemnized as per Muslim Personal Law, by invoking the provisions of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. In support of his contention, the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner relied on the following decisions:

    1. Munshi v. Mt. Alam Bibi, AIR 1932 Lahore 280;

    2. Saifuddin Saheb v. State of Bombay, AIR 1962 SC 853;

    3. Smt. Ass Kaur (deceased) rep. by L.Rs. v. Kartar Singh (Dead) by L.Rs. & others, Appeal (Civil) No. 12395 of 1996, dated on 18.5.2007.

  3. Per contra, Mr. K. Chellapandian, learned Additional Advocate General, strenuously argued that the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 is applicable to everyone in the country, irrespective of their religion, including Muslims, hence the relief sought for in the Writ Petition is not legally sustainable. In support of his contention, the learned Additional Advocate-General relied on the following decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court:

    1. Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum and others, AIR 1985 SC 945;

    2. Javed v. State of Haryana, 2003 (3) CTC 620 (SC): 2003 (8) SCC 369;and

    3. Khursheed Ahmad Khan v. State of U.P.,: 2015 (2) MLJ 237 (SC).

  4. In Munshi v. Mt. Alam Bibi, AIR 1932 Lahore 280, it was held by a Division Bench of Lahore High Court, that under Mohammedan Law even a girl, who attained puberty or completed the age of 15 years, is competent to enter into a marriage contract. Learned Additional Advocate-General argued that the decision reported in AIR 1932 Lahore 280, was rendered during pre-independence period, prior to the commencement of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, hence, the said decision is inapplicable to decide the relief sought for in this Writ Petition. According to the learned Additional Advocate-General, the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, safeguards the rights of the children, including the Muslim girls, since...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT