Court Ensures Safety Despite Voidable Marriage Due to Age Discrepancy
In a significant ruling, the Uttarakhand High Court has directed the police to provide protection to a couple facing threats from family members due to their marriage. The court, presided over by Justice Alok Mahra, addressed a petition filed by Vanshika Tomar and another petitioner, who approached the court seeking safety after solemnizing their marriage on March 24, 2026. Despite the male petitioner not meeting the eligible age for marriage, the court emphasized the paramount importance of safeguarding the petitioners' life and liberty.
During the proceedings, counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Tajhar Qayyum, highlighted the urgent need for protection, citing serious threats from the female petitioner's family who opposed the marriage. The petitioners, both majors, faced resistance primarily because the male petitioner, aged 20 at the time of marriage, had not yet attained the legal marriage age of 21. Despite this, the court held that the marriage was at most voidable, rather than void, and underscored the necessity to ensure the couple's safety.
Referring to the Supreme Court's judgment in Lata Singh v. State of U.P., the High Court reiterated the legal stance that couples should not face threats to their life and liberty due to their marital choices. The court ordered the Station House Officer of Police Station Buggawala, District Haridwar, to assess any threats to the couple's safety and provide protection if necessary. Additionally, it directed the police to counsel the opposing family members and others hostile to the marriage, emphasizing legal compliance.
This judgment reinforces the judiciary's commitment to uphold individual rights and safety, even in cases where social and legal norms around marriage are contested.
Bottom line:-
Protection of life and liberty - The court directed the police to assess the threat to the petitioners' life and limb and provide necessary protection if a threat is found, even if the marriage is voidable due to the male petitioner not attaining the eligible age for marriage.
Statutory provision(s): Protection of life and liberty, age of marriage eligibility, voidable marriage, police protection, counselling hostile parties.
Vanshika Tomar v. State of Uttarakhand, (Uttarakhand) : Law Finder Doc id # 2933856
