01Facts
The petitioners, nineteen named individuals and fifty unknown others, sought to quash an FIR dated 15.02.2026 registered under Sections 191(2), 132, 121(1), 352, and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
¶ 1The informant, a Sub-Inspector, and a Child Line Team attempted to prevent the child marriage of a 16-year-old girl, Sonam, in Village Sunpeda Baksuwa.
¶ 2The FIR alleges that the petitioners assaulted, abused, and threatened the officials, and forcibly took the minor from the custody of the Child Line Team before she was eventually rescued.
¶ 2-3The petitioners argued that under Muslim Personal Law (Shariat), a girl who has attained puberty (15 years) is competent to marry.
¶ 502Issues
i.1. Whether Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) regarding the age of marriage prevails over the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act (PCMA) and the POCSO Act.
¶ 6ii.2. Whether the impugned FIR discloses prima facie offences justifying the continuation of an investigation or if it should be quashed under writ jurisdiction.
¶ 1303Law Applied
The court applied the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act (PCMA), 2006, noting it extends to all citizens irrespective of religion.
¶ 7The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, criminalizes sexual intercourse with any person below 18 years.
¶ 6The PCMA, being a later all-encompassing statute, prevails over the exceptions in Section 2 of the Majority Act, 1875.
¶ 7The court relied on the reasoning in Moidutty Musliyar v. Sub Inspector Vadakkencherry Police Station and noted the Supreme Court’s observations in Society For Enlightenment & Voluntary Action v. Union of India regarding the primacy of the PCMA.
¶ 6-7The court referenced the Bharitya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) regarding obstruction of public servants.
¶ 12Provisions in the judgment · 11 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 191Section 132Section 121Section 352Section 351
Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 Section 1Section 12Section 15
Majority Act, 1875 Section 3Section 2
Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 Section 2
04Reasoning
The court rejected the petitioners' contention that Shariat law grants immunity from the PCMA, holding that child marriage is a violation of public health and national policy translated into prohibitory statutes that no personal law can "wipe out".
¶ 6The court reasoned that since carnal relations are inseparable from marriage, permitting marriage below 18 would lead to an acknowledged violation of the POCSO Act.
¶ 6The court found that the police and Child Line Team acted bona fide within the four corners of the law to prevent a crime.
¶ 12The allegations of physical aggression and forcible taking of the victim from official custody sufficiently disclosed the ingredients of obstruction of duty and assault under the BNS, making it an unfit case for quashing at an "incipient stage".
¶ 12-1305Holding
The court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the age of marriage for every citizen, regardless of religion, is governed by the PCMA.
¶ 6The court found that the FIR contained specific allegations that required thorough investigation and refused to interdict the legal process.
¶ 13-14The interim stay order was vacated, and the authorities were directed to proceed with the investigation.
¶ 15-16Original Court PDF
Rubi And 18 OthersvsState Of U.P. And 3 Others
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
