- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Child Marriages, too, have to be compulsorily registered: Kerala HC
The circulars issued by local self-government authorities of the Kerala government making it mandatory for under age marriages, too, to be registered, have been upheld by the Kerala HC.Writ petitions were filed by the Punarjani Charitable Trust and others seeking quashing of circulars issued by local self-government authorities. A bench comprising Chief Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice A...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
The circulars issued by local self-government authorities of the Kerala government making it mandatory for under age marriages, too, to be registered, have been upheld by the Kerala HC.
Writ petitions were filed by the Punarjani Charitable Trust and others seeking quashing of circulars issued by local self-government authorities. A bench comprising Chief Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice A K Jayasankaran Nambiar heard these writ petitions, which made it clear that there was no legal impediment in registering Muslim marriages where the male had not attained 21 years and the female had not attained 18 years on the basis of the certificate of religious authority as per the Kerala Registration of Marriage (Common) Rules, 2008.
The Government of Kerala had encouraged solemnization of child marriages in violation of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, the bench contended.
Referring to the Seema v. Ashwani Kumar case, the bench noted that registering a marriage provided evidence of the marriage having taken place.
The bench rejected the petitions against the circulars and said, "We are unable to accept the argument advanced by the learned counsel that the circulars would fail the objectives of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act. As a matter of fact, the registration of even child marriages, in our perception, would ensure that there is better transparency and adequate proof to penalise the offenders under the Prohibition of the Child Marriage Act."