Hardev Singh v. Harpreet Kaur & Ors.
Background
The appellant and the first respondent married each other in April 2010 without their parents' consent and sought police protection from the High Court, which was initially granted. Later, acting on an application by the wife's father, the High Court recalled its own protection order and directed registration of an FIR against the husband under Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, on the ground that he was actually a minor (17 years old) at the time of marriage, contrary to what he had earlier stated. The husband appealed to the Supreme Court, which had stayed the High Court's order back in 2010.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that the High Court had no power under Section 482 CrPC to recall or review its own earlier order in a criminal matter. On merits, the Court further held that Section 9 of the 2006 Act, which punishes a "male adult" for marrying a child, could not apply to the husband in any event, because he was himself a minor (below 18) at the time of marriage, and even assuming he was between 18-21, the provision is meant to punish adult men who marry child brides, not to criminalise child grooms who marry adult women. The Court traced the legislative history of the Act to show its protective purpose was aimed at safeguarding minor girls, not penalising young husbands. Since the couple were living together happily with no threat from family, continued police protection was unnecessary, and the FIR direction was quashed; the appeal was allowed.
Lesson Learnt
A court's inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC cannot be used to recall or review its own prior criminal orders, and a criminal provision aimed at protecting minors cannot be turned around to punish the very class of young persons it was designed to protect.