Constitutional Court Says Child Marriages Punishable but Not Void Under Law

The Federal Constitutional Court of Pakistan has ruled that while underage marriages may lead to criminal liability under the Child Marriage Act, 1929, such marriages cannot be declared void because the law only prescribes penal consequences and does not invalidate the union itself.

The ruling was issued in a detailed judgment authored by Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi.

The case involved a Lahore-based girl, Maria Bibi, who converted to Islam and married Shehryar.

The court declared both the conversion and the marriage valid, noting that Maria had embraced Islam before the nikah and had submitted a formal declaration confirming her conversion.

The judgment also observed that under Islamic law, a Muslim man may marry women from the “People of the Book,” including Christians and Jews.

Explaining the legal framework, the court noted that the Child Marriage Act, a colonial-era law still applicable in parts of Pakistan, criminalizes marriages where either party is below the legally prescribed age.

However, the legislation does not render such marriages void or voidable. Instead, it imposes punishments such as fines or imprisonment for individuals who facilitate or contract child marriages.

The court also clarified that questions regarding the girl’s age or the authenticity of religious documents issued by institutions such as a Darul Ifta cannot be examined during habeas corpus proceedings.

According to the ruling, such proceedings are limited to determining whether an individual is being unlawfully detained.

Addressing the facts of the case, the court pointed to contradictions in the father’s claims regarding his daughter’s age.

In the FIR, he stated that Maria was between 13 and 14 years old, but later argued that she was 12 years and nine months old.

The court also raised questions about the documentary evidence presented in the case. According to records from the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA), the age difference between Maria and her younger sister was less than eight months, creating doubts about the accuracy of the documents.

The judgment emphasized that Maria had appeared before a magistrate and clearly stated that she had married voluntarily without coercion.

Her father had earlier registered a kidnapping case in July 2015, alleging that she had been abducted. However, the case was later dismissed after Maria testified that she had not been kidnapped but had chosen to marry willingly.

Subsequently, the father filed several petitions claiming his daughter was underage and unlawfully detained, but these petitions were dismissed by multiple courts before the Constitutional Court upheld the marriage and conversion