2024 Supreme(SC) 945

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI., J.B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, JJ.
Society for Enlightenment and Voluntary Action & Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition (C) No. 1234 of 2017
Decided On : 18-10-2024

Child marriage violates fundamental rights under Article 21, including choice, autonomy, health, and education, obligating the state to prioritize prevention over penalization through robust legal and community measures.

Headnote:(A) Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 - Sections 2(a), 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 2(d) - Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - Section 2(14) - Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 - Sections 3, 13, 17, 24, 25 - Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 - Section 12(c) - Constitution of India - Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(a), 21, 21-A, 39(f), 51 - International Instruments including Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 16), Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (Article 16(2)), and Convention on the Rights of the Child (Article 1, 19, 28, 29, 34) - Focus on prohibition and prevention of child marriage, ensuring child rights, and state obligations under domestic and international law.

(B) Key Legal Principles: The court emphasized that child marriage violates fundamental rights under Article 21, including rights to choice, autonomy, health, education, and childhood development, stating 'child marriage deprives children of their agency, autonomy and right to fully develop and enjoy their childhood' (Para 173). It also recognized the state’s duty to prevent child marriage as part of constitutional and international obligations, noting 'the State has a concrete, enforceable obligation to prevent and eliminate child marriage' (Para 198).

(C) Intersectional Approach: The judgment advocates for an intersectional approach to address overlapping vulnerabilities like gender, caste, and socio-economic status, asserting 'addressing child marriage requires an intersectional approach that acknowledges the overlapping vulnerabilities experienced by children' (Para 208).

Facts of the case:
The petition was filed under Article 32 by an NGO addressing the alarming rate of child marriages despite the enactment of the 2006 Act, seeking stronger enforcement mechanisms, awareness programs, appointment of dedicated officers, and support systems for child brides, as noted in 'the Petitioner’s primary grievance is that despite the enactment of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act 2006, the rate of child marriages in India is alarming' (Para 1).

Findings of Court:
The court found that child marriage constitutes a grave violation of constitutional rights and international norms, necessitating robust preventive measures over mere penalization, and issued comprehensive guidelines for enforcement, awareness, and community involvement, stating 'the orientation of these guidelines is to prioritise prevention before protection and protection before penalisation' (Para 210).

Issues: The main issues addressed include the failure of authorities to prevent child marriages and the need for effective enforcement mechanisms, as framed by the court in 'the Petitioner seeks to address the failure of authorities to prevent child marriages' (Para 1).

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that child marriage infringes on fundamental rights to life, liberty, and education under Article 21, and the state must prioritize prevention through legal, educational, and community measures, emphasizing 'the right to life and liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution is violated by the commission of child marriage' (Para 171).

Result: The writ petition is disposed of with detailed guidelines for implementation (Para 218).