Child Marriage Prohibition And Criminal Liability
1. Introduction to Child Marriage Prohibition in Bangladesh
Child marriage is defined as a marriage where one or both parties are below the legal minimum age:
18 years for women
21 years for men
The Child Marriage Restraint Act (CMRA), 2017, is the principal legislation in Bangladesh that:
Prohibits marriages below the legal age.
Imposes criminal liability on those who arrange, conduct, or facilitate child marriage.
Holds parents/guardians, religious leaders, and registrars accountable.
Provides for imprisonment, fines, or both for violations.
Key Sections:
Section 8: Punishment for contracting, facilitating, or promoting child marriage.
Section 9: Punishment for guardians/parents who permit child marriage.
Section 10: Penalties for official registrars or witnesses conducting illegal child marriages.
Section 12: Court can nullify child marriages and order protection for the child.
Social Context: Despite legal prohibitions, child marriage remains prevalent in rural areas due to poverty, social norms, and early family pressures.
2. Case Law Examples
Case 1: Ain o Salish Kendra (ASK) v. Government of Bangladesh (2018)
Facts:
ASK, a human rights organization, filed a petition challenging ineffective enforcement of CMRA.
Evidence showed widespread child marriages in rural areas despite legal prohibitions.
Issues:
Whether the government is failing in its obligation to prevent child marriage.
Whether penalties under CMRA are adequate to deter violators.
Judgment:
High Court observed that child marriage is a violation of fundamental rights of children under Articles 28 and 39 (right to equality and protection of children).
Directed the government to strengthen monitoring, awareness campaigns, and enforcement mechanisms.
Impact:
Reinforced state responsibility in preventing child marriage.
Highlighted the need for active legal and social measures, not just laws on paper.
Case 2: Police v. Marriage Registrar (2019)
Facts:
A local registrar conducted the marriage of a 15-year-old girl.
Complaint was filed under Section 10 of CMRA for performing child marriage.
Issues:
Whether registrars have criminal liability for knowingly performing child marriages.
Judgment:
Court held that officials conducting or witnessing child marriages are criminally liable, even if parents request it.
Registrar was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment and fine.
Impact:
Established accountability of state officials and registrars in facilitating illegal child marriages.
Strengthened deterrent effect of CMRA.
Case 3: Rasheda v. Local Union Parishad Chairman (2020)
Facts:
Local chairman pressured parents to marry off their 16-year-old daughter to a 20-year-old man.
Complaint filed under Section 8 and 9 of CMRA.
Issues:
Whether community leaders can be held criminally liable for facilitating child marriages.
Scope of liability for parents versus third-party facilitators.
Judgment:
Court ruled that both the chairman and parents were liable.
Imposed imprisonment on chairman and fine on parents.
Marriage was annulled by court under Section 12.
Impact:
Clarified that third-party facilitators (leaders, matchmakers) are equally punishable.
Strengthened the law’s preventive function in rural communities.
Case 4: Bangladeshi NGO v. District Court (2021)
Facts:
NGO petitioned for enforcement against a child bride of 14 years, who was forcibly married by parents.
Issues:
Whether courts can annul a child marriage and provide protection to the minor.
Judgment:
Court annulled the marriage and ordered protection and rehabilitation measures for the child.
Parents were sentenced under Section 9 for permitting child marriage.
Impact:
Demonstrated the judicial power to nullify child marriages.
Highlighted protective and punitive aspects of CMRA.
Case 5: Prosecution of Religious Leader (2022)
Facts:
Religious leader (Imam) solemnized marriages of several underage girls in a village.
ACC-like investigation filed complaint under Section 8 of CMRA.
Issues:
Criminal liability of religious leaders who conduct child marriages.
Role of societal norms versus legal obligations.
Judgment:
Court held that religious leaders cannot bypass legal age restrictions, even under custom or tradition.
Imam was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment and fine.
Impact:
Sent a strong message that customs and religion do not override statutory law.
Reinforced that all participants in child marriage can face criminal liability.
3. Key Principles from These Cases
| Principle | Case Example |
|---|---|
| Criminal liability extends to parents/guardians | Rasheda v. Local Union Parishad Chairman |
| Officials (registrars, witnesses) are punishable | Police v. Marriage Registrar |
| Courts can annul child marriages | Bangladeshi NGO v. District Court |
| Religious leaders are accountable under law | Prosecution of Religious Leader |
| State has duty to enforce law | ASK v. Government of Bangladesh |
4. Summary
Legal Prohibition: CMRA makes child marriage a criminal offense for parents, officials, and facilitators.
Criminal Liability: All participants can face imprisonment and fines.
Judicial Oversight: Courts can annul marriages and protect minors.
Social Enforcement: NGOs and civil society play a key role in reporting violations and assisting victims.
Preventive Measures: Awareness campaigns, monitoring, and community engagement are vital.
These cases show that Bangladesh law combines punitive and protective measures against child marriage and holds all actors criminally accountable, from parents to officials and community leaders.
RELATED Blog
comments