HC comes to rescue of ‘minor’ bride, husband

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, April 2

When an eight-month pregnant “girl” went to the Government Multi-Speciality Hospital, Sector 16, with her family, there was no way she could have realised that it was the beginning of a traumatic experience for her and the family. Her husband was arrested even though there was no complaint by the girl’s family. Her child, too, died soon after delivery.

Coming to their rescue, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has taken suo motu cognisance of the matter before issuing a slew of directions to reduce in future the agony of the “two young persons”. Among other things, the UT Legal Service Authority was directed to give compensation to the victim for undergoing the trauma, in which “she lost the child for no fault of her”.

The Bench of Justice Ritu Bahri and Justice Manisha Batra also set a six-week deadline for completing the exercise. It asserted that a 20-year-old man, whose wife was minor and eight-month pregnant, had been put behind bars on the charges of rape and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act on the ground he had failed to show evidence that his family had solemnised his marriage.

The Bench asserted the issue had attained finality that a husband became guardian under the Guardianship and Wards Act, if the girl was married and a minor. The Bench, in a subsequent order, added the newborn boy also died on March 8.

After perusing the reports placed before the court, the Bench asserted it transpired that the victim-girl’s date of birth was July 5, 2005. She was about 17 years and seven months, when the FIR was registered on February 22.

“The trauma undergone by the accused in the FIR, the minor girl and their child cannot be explained in words. There was no complaint to the Police Department by any family members of the victim that she had been forcibly taken away by the accused. Rather, she had gone with her family to the hospital, where keeping in view the provisions of Section 19 of the POCSO Act, a report was sent to the Police Department that a minor girl was pregnant. On the basis of the report sent to the police, the agony of these two young persons started,” the Bench asserted.

Referring to a Delhi High Court judgment, the Bench asserted the FIR registered for rape under Section 376 of the IPC was quashed on the ground that the girl had a right to get the marriage declared void before attaining the age of 18 years if she was minor and married. There was no ground to register an FIR under Section 376, where the girl was ready to stay with her husband and the marriage had been solemnised with the consent of the families.

The Bench added the boy was working at the Trauma Centre, PGI, Chandigarh, and earning Rs 10, 000 monthly.

To mitigate their agony, the respondents were directed to get the statements of the victim, the accused and the family recorded before the court concerned. Directions were also issued to get a legal aid counsel for the couple before getting their statements recorded. The Social Welfare Department could also send a child welfare counsel and record the victim’s statement. The legal aid counsel could then file a petition and get the FIR quashed in accordance with law, the Bench observed.

What court observed

“The trauma undergone by the accused in the FIR, the minor girl and their child cannot be explained in words. There was no complaint to the Police Department by any family members of the victim that she had been forcibly taken away by the accused, the Bench asserted