close
close
Sun. Oct 20th, 2024

The Supreme Court proposes a ban on child engagements

The Supreme Court proposes a ban on child engagements

The Supreme Court has suggested that Parliament consider banning child betrothals by amending the Prevention of Child Marriage Act (PCMA), 2006. Since that PCMA does not deal with child engagements, the Court noted that it could be used to circumvent the penalties under the law. the law.

“Marriages established in a child’s minority also have the effect of violating free choice, autonomy, agency and childhood. It deprives them of the choice of a life partner before they mature and develop the capacity to exercise agency.” the Court noted in its judgment, which laid down several guidelines to effectively implement the PCMA.

The Court noted that international treaties such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) prohibit child betrothals.

“Parliament could consider banning child betrothals, which could be used to avoid punishment under PCMA. While an engaged child may be a child in need of care and protection under the Juvenile Justice Act, the practice requires targeted solutions to achieve its elimination.” the Court noted in its judgment.

The sofa consisting of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra ruled in a PIL filed by the Association for Enlightenment and Voluntary Action seeking steps to stop child marriages.

CJI DY Chandrachud’s verdict emphasized the need to spread awareness among communities instead of focusing only on prosecutions.

“We should not give the impression that we are discouraging persecution, but the goal should not be to simply increase persecution without making efforts to prevent child marriage.” the verdict stated.

The judgment emphasized a ‘community-led approach’ to raising awareness, taking into account the impact of criminalization on families and communities.

Will be updated after the verdict is uploaded.

Case title: Society for Enlightenment and Voluntary Action and Anr. v. UoI and Ors. WP(C) No 1234/2017

By Sheisoe

Related Post