The main legal point established in the judgment is that a minor's fundamental right to life and liberty cannot be denied, and the court has a duty to ensure the welfare and safety of minors, especially in cases involving forced marriage and threats from guardians.

JUDGMENT

Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J. (Oral) - The instant criminal writ petition has been filed by petitioner No.1 who is aged 17 years and 01 month, through petitioner No.2-Shubham who is over 25 years old under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of directions to the official respondent Nos.2 & 3 for protecting of the life and liberty of the petitioners at the hands of private respondent Nos.4 and 5.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has contended that the petitioner No.1 is a minor and that the private respondent No.4(father of petitioner No.1) wants to conduct the marriage of the petitioner No.1 forcibly in an other community. It has been alleged that currently the minor is residing in a live-in-relationship with petitioner No.2-Shubham and wants to marry him in the future. However, respondent Nos.4 and 5 are threatening the petitioners.

3. The question which arises for consideration in the instant petition relates to striking a balance between the Constitutional right to life as enshrined under Article 21 as well as statutory obligation cast under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015, in a case where a minor claims to have abandoned her guardian and approaches the Court through a self-proclaimed next friend/guardian.

4. The instant petition deals with such issue where this Court has been approached by invoking its writ jurisdiction to seek protection of life and liberty apprehending threat to the same and where it is alleged that the natural guardians are wanting to impose their own will over the will of the minor.

5. Reference can be made to certain orders/judgements of this Court passed in CRWP-2238-2021 titled as Priyanka & Another Vs. State of Haryana & Ors decided on 05.03.2021, wherein the minor who was in a live-in-relationship was extended an indulgence; a similar order had been passed in CRWP-6660-2020 titled as Jyoti Vs. State of Haryana & Ors decided on 01.09.2020; CRWP-3990-2020 titled as Roopa Vs. State of Haryana & Ors decided on 22.06.2020; CRWP-1525-2020 titled as Sarabjeet Kaur & Another Vs. State of Punjab & Ors decided on 12.02.2020; CRWP-29048-2019 titled as Navpreet Kaur & Another Vs. State of Punjab & Ors decided on 04.10.2019. A reference was also made to the judgement of this Court reported as 2019(4) RCR (Civil) 183 titled as Jashanpreet Kaur & Another Vs. State of Punjab & Ors.

6. The gist of the aforesaid orders/judgements was to the effect that merely because the petitioners are not of marriageable age, it would not deprive them of their fundamental right to seek protection of their lives and liberties. The Court examined the issue in the context of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and held that merely because the petitioners are not of the marriageable age and the marriage performed, if any, would be hit by Section 5(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, the same being only a civil consequence qua the validity of the marriage, their rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India cannot be denied as they stand on a much higher pedestal. Life and liberty of the persons is sacrosanct being integral to their being, it ought to be protected regardless of solemnization of invalid or void marriage or even in the absence of any marriage amongst the parties. In all the said matters, the respective SSPs/SPs were directed to verify the threat perception and to take necessary steps to provide protection to the life and liberty of the petitioners, if deemed fit and necessary.

7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the documents appended by them with the respective petition. The documents are in the nature of documents related to date of birth and a representation submitted to the concerned SSP/SP.

8. Law recognizes the guardians of following types:-

(a) Natural guardian;

(b) Testamentary Guardian;

(c) Guardians appointed/declared by the Court;

(d) a person empowered to act as such by or under any enactment relating to any Co