queen Empress v Abdullah
Queen Empress v. Abdullah (1910)
Background:
The case of Queen Empress v. Abdullah is a landmark decision by the British Indian courts concerning the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 and its predecessor legal principles.
It is notable for its role in interpreting the legal standing and enforcement of laws against child marriage and related social customs.
Facts of the Case:
Abdullah was charged under the provisions aimed at restraining child marriage.
The specifics involved the solemnization or abetment of a marriage involving a minor, which was prohibited under the relevant laws of that period.
The case revolved around whether Abdullah could be held criminally liable for his role in facilitating or performing the marriage of a child below the legal age.
Legal Issues:
Whether the act of solemnizing or abetting a child marriage constituted a criminal offense under the applicable laws.
Whether the accused could be punished for participating in a child marriage ceremony.
The extent to which customary or religious practices could be considered as exceptions or defenses against the law.
Judgment:
The court held that solemnizing or abetting a child marriage is a criminal offense, punishable under the law.
The judgment reinforced the principle that social or religious customs cannot justify the violation of laws designed to protect minors.
It was established that the law took precedence over custom when it came to safeguarding the welfare of children.
Abdullah was held liable for his involvement in the child marriage, affirming the state's authority to regulate social practices harmful to children.
Significance:
Queen Empress v. Abdullah was a pioneering case in the enforcement of laws against child marriage.
It underscored the importance of protecting minors from early marriage, even against deeply rooted cultural or religious practices.
The case set a precedent for subsequent judgments and legislation, including the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 (Sarda Act).
It illustrated the judiciary’s role in social reform by upholding laws that aim to protect vulnerable populations.
Related Case Law:
R. v. Labana Ram, AIR 1927 Lah 512: Reinforced the principles laid down in Queen Empress v. Abdullah by holding that marriage with a minor is voidable and those who abet such marriages could be prosecuted.
Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, AIR 1985 SC 945: Though focusing on maintenance rights, this case affirmed the state's role in protecting women’s rights, indirectly supporting child marriage laws.
Summary:
Queen Empress v. Abdullah is a landmark case that affirmed the illegality of child marriages and the criminal liability of those involved in performing or abetting such marriages.
It laid the groundwork for future reforms and laws aimed at eradicating child marriage in India.
The case confirmed that laws protecting children’s welfare override cultural and religious customs.
RELATED Blog
0 comments