The story so far: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that under Muslim personal law, a person who has attained puberty is presumed to be competent to marry a person of their choice.
The observation came while the court was hearing a petition filed by a Muslim couple seeking protection of their life and liberty after marrying against the wishes of the woman’s family.
Marriage of minor Muslim girls | Supreme Court to check legality of personal law The judgment highlights an ongoing legal question concerning the interplay between personal laws and statutory child-protection frameworks, such as the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (PCMA) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, 2012 (POCSO) Act.
Under the PCMA, a “child” means a male who has not completed 21 years of age or a female who has not completed 18 years of age.
A “child marriage” is a marriage to which either of the contracting parties is a child.
What was the case?
Justice Vikram Aggarwal made the observation while dealing with a petition filed by a 26-year-old Muslim man and a 17-year-and-eight-month-old Muslim woman, who sought protection from the woman’s family.
The couple said they had performed nikah after the woman’s father opposed their relationship.
The court also observed that “As per Muslim Personal Laws, a boy or girl who has attained the age of puberty, which happens to be 15 years, is at liberty to marry anyone of his or her liking”.
What does Muslim personal law say?
The high court referred to Article 195 of Sir Dinshah Fardunji Mulla’s Principles of Mohammedan Law, which recognises a Muslim of sound mind who has attained puberty as competent to enter into a marriage contract.
In the absence of evidence establishing an earlier or later attainment of puberty, the legal presumption operates from the age of 15 years.
‘Minor Muslim girl can marry without consent on attaining puberty’ The court also relied on its earlier decision in Kammu v.
State of Haryana (2010), wherein it had held that a Muslim boy or girl who has attained puberty is at liberty to marry a person of their choice, and that a guardian cannot interfere with such a choice where the requirements of the applicable law are satisfied.
What have courts ruled over the years?
When it comes to Muslim personal law and the question of marriage of minors, different high courts have shown different opinions over the period of time.
In Mohd.
Samim v.
State Of Haryana, decided by the Punjab & Haryana High Court on September 26, 2018, the court examined the validity of the marriage between a man and a 16-year-old girl at the time of marriage.
The petitioner argued that under Muslim Personal Law, the marriage was valid and that the PCMA did not apply.
After considering various precedents and legal provisions, the court concluded that the marriage was valid under Muslim law, as the girl had attained puberty and was considered a major under Muslim Personal Law.
Consequently, the court directed her release from a Safe House, allowing her to reside with her husband.
Practice and law: debating aspects of the Muslim personal law In Rahul v.
State of Karnataka (2021), the Karnataka High Court noted that the POCSO Act will have an overriding effect on Muslim personal law.
The issue was considered again in Aleem Pasha v.
State of Karnataka (2022).
The Karnataka High Court observed that the POCSO Act is a special legislation to protect children from sexual offences and therefore, it will have an overriding effect on Muslim personal law.
The court noted that a person will be held guilty of penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act if the wife is under the age of 18, even if the sexual intercourse took place in the course of the marriage.
The petitioner, who was seeking bail, argued that since the girl had reached puberty in the present case and that Mohammedan law treats reaching puberty as a consideration for marriage at the age of 15, there had been no violations.
The high court strongly disagreed with this argument, stating that the POCSO Act overrides personal law and that the age for engaging in sexual activity is 18 years.
SC notice on NCPCR plea In October 2022, the Supreme Court issued notice on a plea by the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) seeking examination of the question arising from a Punjab and Haryana High Court ruling concerning a Pathankot-based Muslim couple, who had married under Muslim rites and sought protection from their families.
But the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the relief granted to the couple.
The High Court’s ruling had stemmed from a petition by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the NCPCR.
He urged the court to stay the high court’s observations, terming it a “serious issue” in view of the statutory prohibition of child marriages.
The Supreme Court in January 2023 had also stated that the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Javed v.
State of Haryana and Others (2022), which had held that a Muslim girl aged 15 years can enter into a legal and valid marriage as per personal law, should not be relied upon as a precedent in any other case.
In Moidutty Musliyar v.
State of Kerala, 2024, the Kerala High Court refused to quash proceedings against the persons accused of conducting a child marriage and facing offences under Sections 10 and 11 of the PCMA.
The accused had argued that the Muslim personal law would apply to the parties and not the provisions of the Act.
The court rejected the plea.
In Rubi v.
State of U.P.
2026, the Allahabad High Court held that Muslim personal law recognising puberty as the age of marriage cannot override statutory provisions like the PCMA and the POCSO, which criminalise sexual relations with a child and provide protections to children.
NCW calls for legislation to codify Muslim personal law related to marriage However, on August 19, 2025, the Supreme Court dismissed a petition filed by the NCPCR challenging the 2022 judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which held that under Muslim personal law, a girl who has attained puberty or is aged 15 years and above, could marry, notwithstanding the provisions of the POCSO Act.
The High Court had also extended protection to the couple against threats to their life and liberty.
A Bench of Justices B.V.
Nagarathna and R.
Mahadevan ruled that the Commission lacked the locus standi to assail the High Court’s order.
What happened in the current case?
The latest Punjab and Haryana High Court order did not finally determine whether the 17-year-old’s marriage was valid.
It dealt with the couple’s request for protection and referred to the position under Muslim personal law.
The court directed the Senior Superintendent of Police (Rural), Ludhiana, to consider the couple’s August 30 representation and take appropriate action, if required, in accordance with law.
The petition was disposed of with these directions.
The broader legal question — how the position of Muslim personal law interacts with statutory protections for children — remains contested across courts.
