Case: Society for Enlightenment and Voluntary Action and Anr. V Union of India & Ors. (2024 Insc 790)

Bench- Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra

Facts

An NGO named Society for Enlightenment and Voluntary Action filed a Public Interest Litigation under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, raising serious concerns over the continued prevalence of child marriages in India, despite the enactment of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. The petition sought stronger enforcement mechanisms, awareness programs, the appointment of Child Marriage Prohibition Officers (CMPOs), and comprehensive support systems for child brides. A key concern raised was the absence of a specific law prohibiting or preventing child betrothals, which are often used to circumvent the PCMA.

Issues:

1. Whether the State has failed in discharging its constitutional and statutory obligations under the PCMA and relevant fundamental rights provisions (like Articles 14, 15, 21)?

2. Whether there is a need for stronger implementation and enforcement mechanisms to prevent child marriages?

3. Whether the government should be directed to adopt a multi-dimensional approach including awareness, rehabilitation, and support for child brides?

4. Whether the current legal framework is sufficient to tackle the menace of child marriages, as the data surrounding the same shows otherwise?

Analysis

• The Supreme Court held that child marriage directly violates Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees not just life but a life lived with dignity. For children, this right extends to personal autonomy, the freedom to make choices, bodily integrity, and access to mental and physical health.

• The Court observed that child marriage forces minors into adult responsibilities like cohabitation, sexual relations, pregnancy, and earning a livelihood—roles they are not physically or emotionally prepared for. This, the Court stated, is a denial of their right to self-determination.

• It was emphasized that child marriage strips children—both girls and boys—of their agency and the ability to grow and develop freely. It deprives them of their right to enjoy childhood and gradually evolve into mature decision-makers.

• While the impact is more severe on girls, the Court acknowledged that boys too are affected. However, girls are often subjected to early pregnancies, social isolation, and a premature end to education, making them more vulnerable to long-term harm.

• The judgment specifically highlighted that forcing girls into marriage infringes on their right to reproductive autonomy. The freedom to make decisions about one’s own body, especially in matters of sexual and reproductive health, is a protected right under Article 21.

• The Court expressed concern about the permanent damage child marriage can cause—both physically and mentally—resulting in trauma, health complications, and emotional distress. Such harm, it held, is incompatible with a dignified life.

• The impact on education was another significant concern. The Court stated that marriage often leads to the abrupt end of education, particularly for girls, and this directly violates their right under Article 21-A, which guarantees free and compulsory education for all children between 6 and 14 years.

• In its observations, the Court stressed that addressing child marriage requires more than punishment. It called for a preventive and rehabilitative approach, urging authorities to focus on awareness, early intervention, and support for at-risk children and survivors.

• It urged all stakeholders—government bodies, civil society organizations, educators, and local leaders—to work together to challenge the social acceptance of child marriage through community-based strategies.

• The Court concluded that unless the structural and cultural factors sustaining child marriage are addressed through education, empowerment, and sustained outreach, the law alone cannot eliminate the practice.

Judgment

The Supreme Court of India declared child marriage, including child betrothals, as unlawful and strongly recommended that Parliament take legislative steps to explicitly prohibit the practice. Alongside this, the Court issued a set of comprehensive guidelines aimed at preventing and eliminating child marriage. The Court directed that the judgment be circulated to the Secretaries of all relevant Ministries, statutory authorities, and affiliated institutions and organizations under the Government of India, urging coordinated and effective implementation of these measures to address the root causes of child marriage. The guidelines are as follows:

• • State Governments and Union Territories were directed to appoint dedicated Child Marriage Prohibition Officers (CMPOs) at the district level. These officers should undergo mandatory training, have their performance periodically reviewed, and be equipped with adequate support to function effectively.
• • To strengthen enforcement, it was suggested that District Collectors and Superintendents of Police take active responsibility for monitoring and preventing child marriages in their jurisdictions. Negligence on their part would attract disciplinary and legal consequences.
• • States were encouraged to consider integrating Special Juvenile Police Units (SJPU) into the preventive framework. These units could be vital in identifying and intervening in at-risk situations involving minors.
• • A State-level Special Child Marriage Prohibition Unit was to be constituted, consisting of CMPOs, trained officials, and social workers with field experience in child rights. Their role would be to coordinate efforts across departments and regions.
• • Judicial officers, especially Magistrates, were empowered to take suo motu action in suspected or known instances of child marriage. Courts were encouraged to use preventive injunctions to stop such marriages before they occur, particularly on dates known for mass weddings.
• • Recognizing the urgency of timely intervention, the Court suggested that where feasible, special fast-track courts be established to deal specifically with cases of child marriage. This would ensure that victims receive swift justice and that deterrence is maintained.
• • The Court stated that any failure by public servants to act in child marriage cases should be met with strict disciplinary and legal action, reinforcing accountability within the administration.
• • A “Child Marriage Free Village” initiative was proposed, encouraging Gram Panchayats and village-level leaders to play an active role in preventing child marriages. These communities were to receive regular orientation and capacity-building workshops to help them act effectively.
• • States and UTs were asked to draw up Annual Action Plans with specific performance indicators. These plans should account for regional social norms and adopt localized, community-based approaches to prevention.
• • CMPOs were expected to conduct frequent awareness drives in schools, religious institutions, and local bodies like Panchayats. These campaigns were to highlight the legal, health, and social consequences of child marriage.
• • The Court also called for comprehensive sexuality education to be embedded into school curricula. This education was to include information on legal protections, consent, reproductive rights, and the negative impacts of early marriage.
• • Informative posters and educational material on the dangers and illegality of child marriage were to be prominently displayed in schools, community centers, and other public spaces.
• • Community-wide awareness programs targeting parents, religious figures, and other influencers were emphasized. Special attention was to be given to empowering adolescent girls through education and confidence-building initiatives, as well as promoting awareness of helplines and reporting mechanisms.
• • Specialized training programs were to be developed for community health workers, law enforcement officers, and judicial personnel to ensure they are equipped to identify and intervene in cases of child marriage.
• • Teachers and school staff were to be trained to recognize early warning signs—such as unexplained absences or behavioral changes—that may indicate an impending child marriage.
• • Lastly, the Court recommended training local influencers—such as sarpanches, religious leaders, and grassroots workers—to challenge entrenched social norms that fuel the practice. It also advised collaboration with NGOs to ensure sustained outreach, volunteer engagement, and field-level intervention.