Girl Being Minor Not Reason To Deny Protection: High Court Directs Chandigarh SSP To Consider Live-In Couple's Plea

Update: 2023-09-27 15:49 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article
story

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted relief to a live-in couple, the girl being a minor, seeking protection from alleged threats of the girl's family. Court said it wouldn't comment upon the legality of the relationship but,"Mere fact that the petitioners are not of marriageable age or that petitioner No.2 is still a minor, would not deprive the petitioners of their fundamental...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted relief to a live-in couple, the girl being a minor, seeking protection from alleged threats of the girl's family. Court said it wouldn't comment upon the legality of the relationship but,

"Mere fact that the petitioners are not of marriageable age or that petitioner No.2 is still a minor, would not deprive the petitioners of their fundamental rights as envisaged in the Constitution, being citizens of India."

The bench was referring to fundamental right to life and personal liberty guaranteed to every person under Article 21 of the Constitution. It directed the Chandigarh SSP to consider the couple's case for police protection.

A 16-year-old girl and a 19-year-old boy had moved the Court expressing their wish to get married against the wishes of their parents and seeking police protection based on perception of threats from them.

Court said, "Article 21 of the Constitution of India stipulates protection of life and liberty to every citizen and that no person shall be deprived of his life and personal liberty except in accordance with procedure established by law. As per the Constitutional mandate it is the bounden duty of the State to protect the life and liberty of every citizen."

It referred to Jobanpreet Singh & Anr. vs. State of Punjab (2022) where the High Court had said that POCSO Act, which penalizes sexual relations with a minor, does not run contrary to Article 21 of the Constitution. It had also said that Courts must step into the shoes as a guardian of such minor and take all steps necessary to protect the life and liberty of such a minor.

Considering the aforesaid, the Court invoked its parens patriae jurisdiction to examine the best interest of the minor and directed the SSP as well as the Child Welfare Committee to take all steps detailed in the directions contained in Khuspreet Singh & Anr v. State of Punjab (2022).

In Khuspreet Singh (supra) the High Court had directed that when a minor approaches the court for police protection, the Child Welfare Committee shall take appropriate decision with respect to the boarding and lodging of the minor and also to conduct enquiry on all issues relating to and affecting safety and well-being of the child/minor. It was also directed that the concerned SSPs/SPs/CPs will take steps against the threat perception to the minor and her next friend, through whom the minor approached the Court.

Also Read: Punjab & Haryana High Court Directs Police To Ensure Safety Of 'Major-Minor' Live-In Couple

Appearance: Sachin Kalia, Advocate for the petitioners.

Tarunvir Singh Lehal, Addl. P.P. (UT), Chandigarh.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (PH) 185

Case Title: Vikram Kumar & Ors. v. State of U.T. Chandigarh and others

Click here to read/download the order

Full View
Tags:    

Similar News