Substantive Equality in Child Marriage Laws

Table of Contents

Context: The Allahabad High Court in Sanjay Chaudhary v. Guddan (2024) annulled a child marriage where the man was 12 and the woman was 9 at the time of marriage, under Section 3 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act (PCMA), 2006.

Provisions Related to Child Marriage

Prohibition of Child Marriage Act (PCMA), 2006

Defines a child as a girl below 18 years and a boy below 21 years.
Section 3: Allows annulment of child marriage if filed within two years of attaining majority (18 for girls, 21 for boys).
Criminalizes marriage involving a minor, with penalties for adult men marrying underage girls.
Indian Majority Act, 1875: Declares majority at 18 years for both males and females.

Independent Thought v. Union of India (2017)

Struck down the marital rape exception for wives below 18 years.
Observed that males could annul child marriages till 23 years but without detailed examination of PCMA.

Relevant Cases and Verdicts

Sivakumar v. The Inspector of Police (2011) – Madras HC

Held that if annulment is only allowed until 20 for men, it creates an unfair disadvantage for males married at 20 but unable to annul their marriage.
Extended the age limit to 23 years for males.

Sanjay Chaudhary v. Guddan (2024) – Allahabad HC

Held that males entering marriage after 18 cannot claim ignorance of the law.
Differentiation in age stems from patriarchal notions, and both genders should have the same annulment age limit.
However, since the Supreme Court in Independent Thought (2017) had suggested 23 years, the High Court followed that precedent while calling for gender equality in annulment rights.

What Needs to Be Done?

Uniform Age of Marriage at 18 for All Genders: Current age differentiation (18 for women, 21 for men) is based on outdated gender roles.
- Raising the marriage age to 21 for women (as proposed in the 2021 amendment bill) could curb autonomy rather than empower women.
Equal Annulment Period for Both Genders: Males currently have till 23 years to annul marriage, while females have till 20 years, creating gender disparity.
- The law should be uniform for both.
Strengthening Social Reforms Instead of Criminalisation: Studies indicate that 4% of child marriages are self-initiated, mainly opposed by families.
- Raising the age will lead to increased state and parental control, risking criminalization and institutionalization of young couples.
- Better alternatives: Free and compulsory education, access to healthcare, social security, and sexuality education.
Increase Time Limit for Annulment Petitions: Given the socio-economic and psychological constraints, the window to seek annulment should be extended beyond the current two-year limit.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s ruling in this case will set a precedent for whether men can seek annulment till 23 or only till 20 years. More broadly, it presents an opportunity to re-examine gendered legal assumptions and move toward equal marriage laws and annulment rights for both men and women.