1. Statutory Framework

(A) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA)

• Under Section 5, minimum age of marriage:
  • Groom: 21 years
  • Bride: 18 years
• A child marriage (below age) is not void automatically.
• It is generally voidable, i.e., it can be annulled at the option of the minor party.

(B) Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (PCMA)

• Declares child marriage prohibitive and punishable, but:
  • Such marriages are neither automatically void nor void ab initio in most cases.
  • They remain valid until annulled by a court.

(C) Section 16, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

This is the most important provision regarding legitimacy:

• Children born from:
  • void marriages, or
  • voidable marriages that are annulled
    👉 are treated as legitimate children.

However:

• Their rights are limited to the parents’ property only, not the coparcenary property (as earlier interpreted).

2. Legal Position on Legitimacy in Child Marriage

Key Principle:

Even if a marriage is invalid or annulled due to minority, the child’s legitimacy is protected by law.

Effects:

• Child is legitimate in law
• Child can inherit:
  • self-acquired property of parents
• Child is protected from social stigma
• Child is entitled to maintenance

3. Judicial Interpretation (Key Case Laws)

1. Parayankandiyal Eravath Kanapravan Kalliani Amma v. K. Devi

• AIR 1996 SC 1963
• Supreme Court held:
  • Section 16 must be interpreted liberally
  • Purpose is to protect legitimacy of children
  • Children born from void marriages are legitimate for all practical purposes

2. Revanasiddappa v. Mallikarjun

• (2011) 11 SCC 1
• Landmark judgment:
  • Children born from void marriages are not illegitimate in a social sense
  • They are entitled to inherit both self-acquired and ancestral/coparcenary property
  • The Court expanded the scope of Section 16

3. Bharatha Matha v. R. Vijaya Renganathan

• (2010) 11 SCC 483
• Held:
  • Children from void marriages are legitimate under Section 16
  • But inheritance rights were initially limited to self-acquired property only
  • Later interpretation in Revanasiddappa broadened this view

4. Tulsa v. Durghatiya

• (2008) 4 SCC 520
• Though relating to live-in relationships:
  • Supreme Court emphasized that child legitimacy should not suffer due to parents’ relationship status
  • Reinforces protective approach toward children born outside valid marriage

5. S.P.S. Balasubramanyam v. Suruttayan

• (1994) 1 SCC 460
• Held:
  • Strong presumption of marriage if a couple lives together
  • Children born from such relationship are legitimate

6. Independent Thought v. Union of India

• (2017) 10 SCC 800
• Though focused on marital rape exception:
  • Supreme Court reinforced that child rights are independent of marital validity
  • Recognized child protection principles under constitutional morality

7. Parameshwari v. Balakrishnan (supporting principle)

• Courts have consistently held:
  • Social justice requires that children should not suffer for parents’ illegality or incapacity

4. Legal Effects of Legitimacy in Child Marriage Cases

(A) Rights of Children

• Right to maintenance under:
  • Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act
  • CrPC Section 125
• Right to inherit property (as per Section 16 HMA)
• Right to legitimacy and social recognition

(B) Limitations

• Initially restricted inheritance rights (before judicial expansion)
• Cannot invalidate the marriage itself unless annulled
• Rights depend on interpretation of “void vs voidable”

5. Distinction: Void vs Voidable Child Marriage

6. Conclusion

The Indian legal system strongly prioritizes child protection over marital invalidity. Even if a marriage is performed when parties are minors:

• The child is legitimate under law
• Courts have expanded rights through progressive interpretation
• The trend is toward complete social and economic protection of children