Underage man can live with wife: Supreme Court

What is the minimum age to get married in your country? Naturally, anyone above the age of 18 has the right to take their own decisions.

Does this also apply in the case of marriage, where there is a legal age to be to get married?

An adult couple can be in a live-in relationship even if the man isn’t 21 years, the legal age for marriage, the Supreme Court has ruled, telling 20-year-old Thushara that she was free to decide who she wanted to live with.

The high court of Kerala had last year annulled her marriage and sent her back to her father on grounds that the Nandakumar wasn’t 21 when they married in April last year, saying they had the right to live outside wedlock.

A bench of Justices A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan said that even if the marriage had not been validly solemnised, as held by the high court, the couple had the right to cohabit as “live-in relationships” had become an accepted fact of life.

The apex court agreed with the submission of the counsel for the groom, Nandakumar, that his wife Thushara, who is a major, had the right to live wherever she wanted to or go wherever she wanted.

Under the Hindu Marriage Act, the groom has to be at least 21 years old and the bride 18.

Nandakumar, who has approached the top court, will turn 21 on May 30 this year.

READ ALSO: Here are some secret tips for happy marriage life

“Learned counsel for the appellants is right in his submission. Even the counsel for the state did not dispute the aforesaid position in law and, in fact, supported this submission of the learned counsel for the appellants,” the Supreme Court said in a recent order.

“Insofar as the marriage of appellant No. 1 (Nandakumar) with Thushara is concerned, it cannot be said that merely because appellant No. 1 was less than 21 years of age, marriage between the parties is null and void. Appellant No. 1, as well as Thushara, are Hindus.

“Such a marriage is not a void marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955… It is sufficient to note that both appellant No. 1 and Thushara are majors. Even if they were not competent to enter into wedlock… they have the right to live together even outside wedlock.

“It would not be out of place to mention that ‘live-in relationship’ is now recognised by the legislature itself which has found its place under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005,” the court said in the order.

The marriage had been solemnised on April 12, 2017, at the Chakkulathukavu Bagavathi temple in Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala.

At the time of the marriage, Thushara was 19 years old. Following a petition filed by the girl’s father, Kerala High Court had annulled the marriage on the ground that the boy had not attained the age of 21.

Further, the high court had said that the couple had not been able to furnish evidence of their marriage although they were living together.

The Supreme Court also cited the Hadiya verdict that concluded the court could not assume the “role of a super guardian” for adults.

Hadiya’s marriage to a Muslim man, Shafin Jahan, was annulled by the Kerala High Court last year after her father alleged that she had been brainwashed and forced to convert. The father’s version was cited by right-wing groups to label it as “love jihad”, a term used by them to accuse Muslim men of trapping and marrying Hindu women to recruit them for terror.

The top court initially ordered a probe by the National Investigation Agency into the marriage but later came around to acknowledging the couple’s right to decide their present, and future.

In the present case, the Supreme Court said it was for Thushara to decide on her course of life.