Court Rules No Obligation for Venue Owners to Verify Age of Bride and Groom
In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court, Kalaburagi Bench, has quashed the criminal proceedings against Abdul Hameed, the owner of Hussain Palace, a marriage hall in Vijayapura. The proceedings were initially instituted under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, following the marriage of a minor girl at his venue. The judgment, delivered by Justice Rajesh Rai K., highlighted the absence of any legal requirement for marriage hall owners to verify the age of the bride and groom.
The case emerged after a complaint was lodged by the Supervisor of the Women and Child Development Department, alleging that a minor girl, Uzma Banu, aged 17 years and 8 months, had been married and subsequently delivered a child. This led to the registration of a case against six individuals, including Hameed, who was accused of facilitating the marriage by renting out his hall.
During the proceedings, the defense, represented by Advocate Shaikh Yusuf Shaikh Salum, argued that Hameed had no knowledge of the minor's age or the details of the marriage arrangements, as the hall was booked by the parents of the involved parties. The court concurred, noting the lack of evidence showing Hameed's intent or knowledge regarding the minor's marriage.
The High Court emphasized the importance of distinguishing between genuine and vexatious allegations, referencing the Supreme Court's guidance on the matter. The judgment underscored that false or frivolous complaints could unjustly damage reputations, necessitating careful judicial scrutiny.
Concluding that the charges against Hameed were unfounded, the court ordered the quashing of proceedings, asserting that continuation would constitute an abuse of the judicial process.
Bottom Line:
Prosecution of a marriage hall owner under Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, quashed by the court on the grounds that there is no rule mandating the owner to verify the age of the bride and groom while renting the hall, and no evidence of knowledge or intention to facilitate the minor's marriage.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528, Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 Sections 9, 10, and 11
Abdul Hameed v. State By Golgumbaz P.S., (Karnataka)(Kalaburagi Bench) : Law Finder Doc id # 2854981
