Limitation Period For Husband's Plea To Annul Child Marriage Starts From Age 18 Or 21? Supreme Court To Decide

The Supreme Court today issued notice on a petition raising the issue as to whether the age of 'majority' - for males - when computing limitation period for filing a petition seeking annulment of marriage under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act (PCMA), should be 18 years or 21 years.

A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Ahsanuddin Amanullah passed the order, while dealing with the petitioner-wife's plea against an Allahabad High Court judgment, which allowed the respondent-husband's prayer to declare the couple's marriage void even though the annulment was applied for when he was about 23 years of age.

For context, under Section 3(3) of PCMA, any person who was a child at the time of his/her marriage, whether solemnized before or after commencement of the Act, can apply for annulment thereof. This is subject, however, to the petition for annulment being filed within 2 years of such person attaining majority.

In the present case, the husband is stated to have been 12 yrs of age (born in 1992), and the wife 9 yrs of age (born in 1995), when the two got married. In 2013, the husband filed a suit under Section 12(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) seeking annulment of the marriage. Subsequently, he sought to amend the suit to invoke Section 3 of PCMA, which was permitted.

The Family Court dismissed the suit, noting that prior to the filing thereof, the husband had initiated a divorce case under Section 13 of HMA, which was dismissed (due to non-appearance) but implicitly confirmed and ratified the validity of the marriage. It was also noted that the suit was barred by limitation and conditions of Section 12(2) HMA were not met. Further, the Court observed that the parties had cohabited for a certain period, thereby affirming the validity of the marriage.

Aggrieved, the husband moved the Allahabad High Court, which held in his favor by judgment dated 25.10.2024 and declared the marriage void. The High Court related the husband's amendment of the suit (invoking Section 3(3) of PCMA) to the date of institution of the suit (in 2013) and observed that he had limitation available upto 23 yrs of age to institute the suit.

"the suit was instituted within limitation, it having been instituted before expiry of 2 years from the date the appellant ceased to be a "child" i.e. attained 21 years of age", the High Court stated.

While the marriage was declared void, the High Court ordered payment of permanent alimony to the tune of Rs.25 lakhs to the wife. At the same time, a prayer for residential accommodation raised by her was denied. Challenging the judgment, she filed the present petition.

The petitioner-wife urges that the High Court judgment extended the limitation period for filing of a suit to void a child marriage upto the age of 23 for a male and the same is in conflict with the legislative purpose, constitutional principles and protective ethos of PCMA.

"the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act aims to discourage and annul child marriages, with a focus on protecting vulnerable female parties. The interpretation endorsed by the Hon'ble High Court dilutes this objective..."

According to her, the respondent-husband's suit for annulment of marriage was barred by limitation as it was filed after the expiry of 2 yrs since he attained the age of majority ie 18 yrs. (in 2010).

Reliance in this regard is placed on Section 2(f) of PCMA (as per which 'minor' is a person who, under The Majority Act, 1875, is deemed not to have attained majority) and Section 3(1) of The Majority Act (as per which a person domiciled in India attains the age of majority on completing the age of 18 yrs).

"The Respondent, having attained majority on 07.08.2010, filed the annulment petition on 05.07.2013, well beyond the limitation period prescribed under Prohibition of Child Marriage Act...the Hon'ble High Court has...failed to appreciate the distinction between the age of legal capacity to marry and the age of legal capacity to institute legal proceedings", the petition states.

The wife further contends that though as per Section 2(a) of PCMA, a male under 21 yrs of age cannot legally enter into a valid marriage, under Section 2(f) read with Section 3(1) of the Majority Act, he ceases to be a "minor" upon attaining the age of 18 yrs and gains the legal capacity to file a suit seeking annulment of a child marriage.

The grounds raised include inter-alia that by permitting males to annul marriages until the age of 23, while limiting female to 20, the interpretation of the High Court violates the principle of equality enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution.

"There is no constitutional, social, or biological justification for such differential treatments, which undermines the legislative protections the PCMA aims to extend to both genders...different limitation period to institute a legal proceedings for a male and female is discriminatory in nature and not in consonance with the intention of the legislature."

The wife also challenges the High Court's relating of the husband's plea for amendment to the date of filing of the original suit. On facts, she mentions that she has studied only till Class 5, while the husband is a dental surgeon who earns well.

Advocate-on-Record Saurabh Ajay Gupta appeared for the petitioner-wife.

Case Title: GUDDAN @USHA Versus SANJAY CHUDHARY, SLP(C) No. 771/2025

Related - Read Supreme Court's Guidelines Against Child Marriages