Can a Marriage Be Valid if One Party is Underage? Supreme Court Clarifies
Nandakumar & Anr. vs The State of Kerala & Ors.
Listen to this judgment
• 4 min readKey Takeaways
• A court cannot declare a marriage void solely because one party is underage.
• Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act requires the bridegroom to be 21 and the bride to be 18 for a valid marriage.
• Even if one party is underage, the marriage may be voidable rather than void.
• Adults have the constitutional right to choose their partners, irrespective of parental objections.
• The court emphasized the importance of individual choice and liberty in marital relationships.
Introduction
The Supreme Court of India recently addressed a significant issue regarding the validity of marriages where one party is underage. In the case of Nandakumar & Anr. vs The State of Kerala & Ors., the Court clarified that a marriage cannot be deemed void solely on the grounds of one party being underage. This ruling has important implications for the interpretation of marriage laws in India, particularly under the Hindu Marriage Act.
Case Background
The case arose from a habeas corpus petition filed by the father of Thushara, who claimed that his daughter was missing and was allegedly in the illegal custody of Nandakumar, the appellant. Thushara, at the time of her marriage to Nandakumar on April 12, 2017, was 19 years old, making her legally competent to marry. However, the father contended that Nandakumar was underage, claiming he was less than 21 years old at the time of the marriage.
The High Court of Kerala, upon hearing the case, determined that Nandakumar's date of birth was May 30, 1997, based on his driving license. This meant that he would not attain the age of 21 until May 30, 2018, thus concluding that the marriage was invalid as Nandakumar was not of marriageable age. The High Court ordered that custody of Thushara be returned to her father, which prompted the appeal to the Supreme Court.
What The Lower Authorities Held
The High Court's decision was primarily based on the interpretation of the Hindu Marriage Act, particularly Sections 5 and 12. The court found that since Nandakumar was not of marriageable age, the marriage was not valid. The High Court also noted the absence of a marriage certificate and deemed the marriage as lacking legal standing.
The High Court's ruling raised concerns about the implications of parental authority over adult children's choices, particularly in matters of marriage. The court's decision to prioritize the father's claims over Thushara's autonomy was a focal point of the appeal.
The Court's Reasoning
The Supreme Court, led by Justice A.K. Sikri, overturned the High Court's decision, emphasizing that the marriage between Nandakumar and Thushara could not be declared void merely because Nandakumar was underage. The Court highlighted that both parties were adults, with Thushara being 19 years old and Nandakumar being close to the age of majority.
The Court reiterated that the Hindu Marriage Act does not render a marriage void simply due to the bridegroom's age being below 21 years. Instead, such a marriage is classified as voidable, meaning it can be annulled but is not automatically invalid. The Court underscored the importance of individual choice and the right to live together, even outside of wedlock, as recognized by contemporary legal standards, including the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Statutory Interpretation
The Supreme Court's interpretation of the Hindu Marriage Act was pivotal in this case. Section 5 outlines the conditions for a valid Hindu marriage, including the minimum age requirement. However, the Court clarified that a marriage involving an underage party does not invalidate the union but rather categorizes it as voidable under Section 12. This distinction is crucial for understanding the legal framework surrounding marriage in India.
The Court also referenced previous judgments, including the landmark case of Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M. & Ors., which emphasized the significance of individual liberty and choice in matters of personal relationships. The Court's reasoning reinforced the notion that societal norms should not infringe upon an individual's constitutional rights.
Constitutional or Policy Context
The ruling aligns with the broader constitutional principles enshrined in Articles 19 and 21, which guarantee the right to freedom and personal liberty. The Supreme Court's decision reflects a commitment to uphold individual rights against societal pressures and parental authority, particularly in the context of marriage.
Why This Judgment Matters
This judgment is significant as it reaffirms the autonomy of adults in choosing their partners, regardless of parental objections. It sets a precedent for future cases involving marriage and individual rights, emphasizing that the law must respect personal choices. The ruling also clarifies the legal status of marriages involving underage parties, providing a clearer understanding of the implications of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Final Outcome
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's order that had entrusted custody of Thushara to her father. The Court emphasized that Thushara's freedom of choice should be respected, allowing her to decide with whom she wishes to live. This ruling underscores the importance of individual autonomy in marital relationships and the need for the legal system to protect such rights.
Case Details
- Case Title: Nandakumar & Anr. vs The State of Kerala & Ors.
- Citation: 2018 INSC 383
- Court: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
- Bench: Justice A.K. Sikri, Justice Ashok Bhushan
- Date of Judgment: 2018-04-20