teenage pregnent trapped by law

Pregnant teenager trapped by law 30 Jan 2009, Manoj Mitta, TNN NEW DELHI: That an under-aged pregnant girl needs the care of her family is a no-brainer. But, caught as she is between contradictory child marriage laws and a sluggish Delhi high court, 17-year-old Anamika (name changed), now seven months pregnant, has been languishing in a Nari Niketan for five months. The matter came up seven times before a three-judge bench and thrice before a two-judge bench. Yet, Anamika has got no relief. It's not that she is unwanted ^ both her parents and her husband want her back. After thrice hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by her father Mahadev, the three-judge headed by Justice Vikramjit Sen could not take it up on the last four dates because one judge or the other was not available. Another petition related to Anamika's release was listed thrice before the two-judge bench headed by Justice B N Chaturvedi, which declined to hear the matter till the larger bench gave its verdict. The stalemate is over anomalies arising from the two-year-old Prevention of Child Marriage Act (PCMA). The PCMA laid down that any child marriage involving kidnapping or other forms of force was ``void''. The earlier law held that the marriage could be repudiated by the girl before she turned 18. The change in PCMA created ambiguities as the government failed to amend other related laws. One such anomaly was highlighted by Mahadev's petition. He challenged the legality of an exception provided in the definition of rape in Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code in keeping with the old notion that all child marriages were not necessarily void. The exception grants immunity against a rape charge to husbands of under-aged girls between 15 and 18. Mahadev asked the HC to strike down the general exception as under the new PCMA, a child marriage based on kidnapping was invalid from the very beginning. Mahadev also sought quashing of a magistrate's order of August 2008, directing the then two-month pregnant Anamika to be sent to Nari Niketan on the grounds that her husband was also under-age (below 21) and that she feared her parents' hostility to her elopement. Anxious to remain with her husband, Anamika refuted her father's allegation that her husband, a neighbour in north Delhi's Samaipur Badli, had kidnapped her in October 2006 when she was 15. Since the FIR lodged by him yielded no result for over a year, Mahadev filed the habeas corpus petition before the HC in May 2008. The police traced Anamika within three months in Etah district of Uttar Pradesh. The husband was later arrested and granted bail. In August 2008, Mahadev's petition was clubbed with a batch of cases placed before the three-judge bench to determine whether a marriage between under-aged persons could be considered valid at any stage; whether the custody of the girl could be given to the husband in such a marriage; and whether the FIR of kidnapping and rape could be quashed. As the court takes its time to decide, those like Anamika continue to suffer the consequences of half-baked reform. (the matter is being arued by Arvind Jain, Advocate of Delhi High Court)

"Loved reading this piece by ARVIND JAIN?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Join our Telegram group

Join our Whatsapp group