The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that under Muslim Personal Law, a Muslim boy or girl who has attained puberty is considered capable of marrying a person of their choice, with puberty presumed at 15 in the absence of evidence to the contrary. The observation came while hearing a protection plea filed by a Muslim couple from Ludhiana.
The man was 26 and the woman was 17 years and eight months old when they performed Nikah on August 22, 2026, allegedly against her family’s wishes. Justice Vikram Aggarwal, however, made it clear that the court was not deciding the validity of their marriage. Instead, it directed the Senior Superintendent of Police (Rural), Ludhiana, to consider the couple’s representation seeking protection from an alleged threat to their life and liberty.
What The Court Observed
The couple told the court that they had known each other for some time and decided to marry. According to their petition, the woman left her parental home on August 22 and married the 26-year-old man according to Muslim rites the same day. They later submitted a representation to the police on August 30, alleging apprehension of danger from members of her family.
When no decision was taken, they approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. Referring to Article 195 of Sir Dinshah Fardunji Mulla’s Principles of Mohammedan Law, the court noted that a Muslim of sound mind who has attained puberty may enter into a marriage contract, with puberty presumed at 15 in the absence of evidence. Justice Aggarwal observed that a Muslim boy or girl who has attained puberty is “at liberty to marry anyone of his or her liking”.
The Legal Context
The High Court relied on its earlier decisions, including Kammu v. State of Haryana (2010), which dealt with the ability of a Muslim person who has attained puberty to choose a spouse, and Gulam Deen v. State of Punjab (2022), which emphasised that courts hearing protection petitions must address threats to life and liberty rather than necessarily determine the validity of a marriage. The court also noted that the State counsel did not dispute the factual or legal submissions made by the petitioners. Importantly, the September 10 order did not make a final finding on whether the couple’s marriage was legally valid.
The wider legal position remains contested. The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 defines a child in terms of age and prohibits child marriage, while courts have differed on how its provisions interact with Muslim Personal Law. The Kerala High Court, for instance, held in 2024 that the child marriage law prevails over Muslim Personal Law. The Allahabad High Court similarly held in July 2026 that Muslim Personal Law cannot override the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act and the POCSO Act. Meanwhile, earlier Punjab and Haryana High Court judgments have taken a different view in specific circumstances involving Muslim minors who had attained puberty.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
Questions involving marriage, personal law, family consent and the rights of young people require sensitivity and careful attention to both constitutional protections and child-safety laws. The immediate issue before the Punjab and Haryana High Court was the couple’s plea for protection from an alleged threat, while the broader question of how personal law interacts with child-marriage legislation continues to require legal clarity. Respect for individual liberty must go hand in hand with safeguarding children and ensuring that disagreements within families do not become threats to anyone’s safety. How should the law balance personal choice, family concerns and the protection of young people in such cases?
Also Read: ‘Deeply Concerned’: India Reacts After Saudi Arabia Intercepts Drone Near Makkah
