38.6c New Delhi, India, Saturday, December 13, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Punjab & Haryana High Court Issues Notice to Centre, States/UT for Revision of Age of Majority and changing the 150 years old Act

By Saakshi S. Rawat      29 July, 2021 11:58 AM      0 Comments
Punjab & Haryana High Court Issues Notice to Centre, States/UT for Revision of Age of Majority and changing the 150 years old Act

The Punjab and Haryana High Court last week issued notice to the Centre, Punjab and Haryana States, and the UT Chandigarh government to evaluate whether the age of majority should be changed, quoting the Indian Majority Act, which was passed about 150 years ago (146 years to be exact).

Justice Amol Rattan Singh's bench also ordered the Home Secretary that the Chief Secretary shall inform the Court if there is any intention of introducing an amendment to change the age of majority upward.

The court while observing the Government stated that, This court feels compelled to issue notice to the Union of India, the States of Punjab and Haryana, as well as the UT of Chandigarh, to get in to the issue of whether the age of majority needs to be amended or not, the Indian Majority Act, 1875, being an Act enacted more than 150 years ago; notably with teens currently, who are commonly still students well into their 20s, while this was not always the case when the aforementioned Act was written.

The matter in brief

The High Court issued this directive in response to a protection petition submitted by a couple in a live-in relationship. The Court had ordered the State of Haryana to determine the couple's age when it heard the case on 29th June.

In response to this order, the state counsel presented an affidavit filed by Panchkula ACP before the Bench during the hearing last week.

According to the affidavit, the pair was above 18, with the male being three months short of 21 and the girl being slightly short of 19.

Court's directions

The Court noted that, due to the couple's age, the petitioners must be deemed adults (whether this is true psychologically or not is a different matter altogether).

Therefore, the Court said, There really is no need to use the provisions of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, if they have decided to live together and have confirmed no marriage between them. As a result, this court has no choice but to give instructions to respondents 2 and 3 to continue to safeguard the petitioners' life and liberty.

Ultimately, the Court stated that sending notifications is entirely within the legislative domain; but, because these types of instances are becoming more common these days, it is thought important to at least get the reaction of the governments concerned.

In a ruling issued last year by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, it was said that youngsters nowadays achieve both physiological and psychological maturity far before they reach the age of majority set by law.

According to Justice Sanjay Kumar, it is a scientifically proven fact that girls are more matured than boys of the same age, which is why the age of majority [for marriage purposes] is set at 18 for girls and 21 for boys.



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

sc-questions-precedent-on-contractual-bars-to-arbitration-claims-refers-bharat-drilling-to-larger-bench
Trending Judiciary
SC Questions Precedent on Contractual Bars to Arbitration Claims, Refers ‘Bharat Drilling’ to Larger Bench [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court refers the 2009 Bharat Drilling ruling to a larger bench, questioning its use in interpreting contractual bars on arbitration claims.

08 December, 2025 04:45 PM
j-and-k-high-court-upholds-dismissal-of-injunction-plea-in-agrarian-reforms-dispute
Trending Judiciary
J&K High Court Upholds Dismissal of Injunction Plea in Agrarian Reforms Dispute [Read Order]

J&K High Court upholds dismissal of injunction plea, ruling that agrarian disputes fall under Agrarian Reforms Act authorities, not civil courts.

08 December, 2025 05:21 PM
sc-declines-urgent-relief-in-indigo-flight-cancellation-crisis-says-centre-dgca-already-acting
Trending Judiciary
SC Declines Urgent Relief in IndiGo Flight Cancellation Crisis, Says Centre, DGCA Already Acting

Supreme Court declines urgent intervention in the IndiGo flight-cancellation crisis, noting Centre and DGCA actions under the CAR 2024 framework.

08 December, 2025 05:29 PM
sc-rules-temple-funds-belong-to-the-deity-cannot-be-diverted-to-rescue-cooperative-banks
Trending Judiciary
SC Rules Temple Funds “Belong to the Deity”, Cannot Be Diverted to Rescue Cooperative Banks

Supreme Court rules temple funds belong to the deity and cannot be used to rescue weak cooperative banks; directs return of deposits to Thirunelly Devaswom.

08 December, 2025 05:36 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email