A Fatehabad youth & a girl are in for trouble with the High Court of Punjab & Haryana on Monday issuing contempt notices against both of them for supplying wrong information in their plea before the Court.
The authorities have also been asked to apprise the Court in Feb of action taken in their case under the provisions of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act as at the time of marriage, both of them were found underage.
The couple in the appeal filed on Sept 24 had alleged that the boy was 21 years’ old & girl’s age was said to be 20. The petition was filed seeking protection of their life & liberty as they had married on Sept 21 against the wishes of their parents.
However, family members of one of them got whiff of the plea & appeared during the proceedings through an Advocate on Sept 24, stating that they were minors. This prompted the Court to get their age verified.
The Court also made it clear that if both of them are found to be below the marriageable age, the Court wouldn't prohibit their prosecution.
On Oct 5, the authorities apprised the Court that the girl was 17 years & 6 months old, while the youth’s age was 20. The Court questioned their lawyer as to how marriage was conducted between minors. However, no satisfactory response was forthcoming from them. Upon this, the Court sought response from the duo by Oct 29 as to why they should not be proceeded against under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act.
However, no response came from both of them on the adjourned date. The Court, while referring the matter to Contempt of Court, said that if no reply is filed by them to the notice issued to them, no further latitude will be given & it will be taken that they have nothing further to say in the matter & naturally, therefore the contempt plea would be taken to its logical end.
Now, the contempt of court bench on Monday has sought response from them as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated & further, an affidavit has been sought from either Fatehabad superintendent of police or deputy superintendent of police with action-taken report on Feb 16 in this case.
Source Link
Picture Source :
