Criminal Misc. No. M- 4395 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M- 4395 of 2011 Date of decision:-02.06.2011 Arvinder Kaur and another ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Mr. D.S. Kahlon, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Guninder S. Brar, AAG Punjab for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr. Jagdeep Singh, Advocate for respondent No.4. RITU BAHRI J.(Oral) This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for issuing direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 not to harass and disturb the peaceful married life of the petitioners and further not to harass the parents of petitioner No.2 at the instance of respondent Nos.4 to 7. Vide order dated 10.2.2011, while issuing notice of motion, direction was issued to provide adequate security to the petitioners, if required. The grievance of respondent No.4 is that his minor daughter- Arvinder Kaur (petitioner No.1) was taken away by petitioner No.2-Gursewak Singh and they solemnized the marriage on 06.2.2011 at Jagdamba Jyotish Karyalya at Pathankot as per Hindu Rites and Rituals by making false statement that she (Arvinder Kaur) is major and her date of birth is 11.1.1993. Her actual date of birth is 11.1.1995 and she is aged about 16 years. Petitioner No.1 is the Criminal Misc. No. M- 4395 of 2011 -2- only child of her parents. Petitioner No.1-Arvinder Kaur being minor was sent to Nari Niketan at Chandigarh. In the meantime direction was given to the families of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 to make efforts to settle the dispute amicably. They appeared before the Mediation Center on 18.5.2011. Today i.e. 2.6.2011 both the parties are present in the Court. Counsel for the parties state that there is no amicable settlement of the dispute. Counsel for the petitioners has informed the Court that petitioner No.1-Arvinder Kaur is four months pregnant and at this stage she should be sent back alongwith her husband. Mr. Jagdeep Singh, Advocate counsel for respondent No.4 at this stage made a prayer that she be sent to Nari Niketan as she is below 18 years of age. In Sh. Jitender Kumar Sharma versus State and another 2010(4) RCR (Civil) 59 and Amninder Kaur and another versus State of Punjab and others 2010(1) RCR (Criminal) 261 it is held that the marriage between a major boy and minor girl is not void or invalid. As per Section 5(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, the marriage is invalid because it is in violation of Section 5(iii) of the Act, which is reproduced below :- “5. Conditions of a Hindu marriage.-- A marriage may solemnized between any two Hindus, if the following conditions are fulfilled, namely :- (i) XXX XXX XXX (ii) XXX XXX XXX (iii) the bridegroom has completed the age of twenty-one years and the bride the age of eighteen years at the time of the marriage; (iv) XXX XXX XXX (v) XXX XXX XXX And examination of Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act such a marriage would be null and void if it contravenes any one of the conditions Criminal Misc. No. M- 4395 of 2011 -3- specified in clauses of Section 5 of the Act. As per Section 18 of the Act, the punishment prescribed for such a violation is may extend to two years of rigorous imprisonment or with fine which may extend to one lakh rupees or with both. The legislature has not intended to mean that marriage in contravention of Section 5(iii) of the Act is void. As per Section 6 of the Guardians and Wards Act 1890 the natural guardian of a married girl is the husband. As per Section 13 of the Act welfare of minor to be paramount consideration for appointing a guardian of a Hindu minor. Even a husband, who is minor, can be a guardian of a minor wife. On query by this Court petitioner No.1-Arvinder Kaur flatly refused to go with her parents. She is four months pregnant and in view of this it is directed that petitioner No.1-Arvinder Kaur is no longer required to keep in Nari Niketan. She is free to go with her husband-Gursewak Singh. A direction is given that the respondents will not harass the petitioners. However, in view of the fact that petitioner No.1 is pregnant, the parties can re-consider pursuing the proceedings initiated in FIR No.21 dated 08.2.2011 under Sections 363, 366-A and 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar, Tarn Taran. In case the petitioners need any protection, they can approach before the authorities as per the instructions dated 10.8.2010 issued by the Home Department, Punjab. The criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of accordingly. Copy of the order is given under the signatures of the Court Secretary. June 02, 2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Vijay Asija JUDGE