Temples, Marriage Halls must display Child Marriage Warnings: HC says liability extends to all involved

Recently, the Karnataka High Court ruled that criminal liability in child marriage cases extends beyond the couple and their families to include priests, temple authorities, and venue managers, while refusing to quash prosecution against accused persons, sending a strong message that enforcement of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, must be comprehensive and uncompromising.

The case stemmed from a petition seeking the quashing of criminal proceedings initiated under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, where a minor girl was married, and the offence was later challenged on grounds including ignorance of the law and the couple’s subsequent cohabitation. The petitioners argued that the marriage had later been regularised and that no harm persisted. The State, however, opposed the plea, asserting that the offence stood completed at the time of solemnisation and could not be diluted by later developments. The dispute thus centred on whether subsequent marital harmony or lack of legal awareness could negate criminal liability, and whether third parties involved in facilitating such marriages could escape prosecution.

The Court adopted a strict interpretation of the statute, holding that child marriage is a social offence that attracts accountability at every level of participation. It observed, “Ignorance of law is no excuse,” and emphasised that liability arises at the moment the illegal act is committed. The Court further clarified that those who facilitate such marriages, including priests and venue authorities, “cannot claim insulation” under the law.

Stressing the broader social impact, it noted that child marriage deprives individuals of education and opportunity, and warned that allowing such acts to go unchecked would undermine statutory intent. The Court also directed authorities to ensure that all marriage venues prominently display notices about the prohibition and penal consequences of child marriage.

Concluding that no grounds existed to interfere, the Court dismissed the petition and allowed the prosecution to proceed.

Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.