Supreme Court Transfers Petitions on Uniform Marriage Age: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay vs. Union of India (2023)

Date of the Judgment: January 13, 2023
Citation: (2023) INSC 28
Judges: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J.
Can the minimum age of marriage be different for men and women? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question by transferring a case to itself, which challenges the diverse minimum age of marriage for men and women across different legislations. This case, Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay Etc. v. Union of India and Others, seeks to bring uniformity in the marriage age. The bench comprised of Chief Justice Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha.

Case Background

The petitioners filed Transfer Petitions (Civil) Nos 1249-1250 of 2020 seeking the transfer of WP (C) No 8905 of 2019 pending before the Delhi High Court and CW/13784/2019 pending before the Rajasthan High Court to the Supreme Court of India. The core issue in these cases was the lack of uniformity in the minimum age of marriage for men and women across various laws in India. The petitioners argued that this disparity was discriminatory and needed to be addressed.

Timeline

Course of Proceedings

The Rajasthan High Court dismissed CW/13784/2019 for lack of prosecution. Given this dismissal, the Supreme Court focused on the petition pending before the Delhi High Court. The Supreme Court decided to transfer WP (C) No 8905 of 2019 from the Delhi High Court to itself to address the issue of uniform marriage age directly.

Legal Framework

The legal issue revolves around the varying minimum ages of marriage for men and women as prescribed in different legislations. The petitioners argue that these differences are discriminatory and violate the principles of equality enshrined in the Constitution of India. While the specific statutes are not mentioned in the order, the core legal framework is based on the constitutional principles of equality and non-discrimination.

Arguments

The petitioners, including Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, sought the transfer of the cases to the Supreme Court to ensure a uniform minimum age of marriage for men and women. The core argument was that the existing laws, by prescribing different minimum ages, were discriminatory and violated fundamental rights.

The respondents, including the Union of India, did not object to the transfer, and their counsel stated that one of the cases had already been dismissed by the Rajasthan High Court.

Submissions

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The primary issue before the Supreme Court is:

• Whether there should be uniformity in the minimum age of marriage for men and women in diverse legislations.

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

Authorities

No authorities were cited in this order.

Judgment

No authorities were viewed by the court in this order.

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Supreme Court’s decision to transfer the case was primarily influenced by the need to address the substantive issue of the uniform minimum age of marriage for men and women. The Court noted the dismissal of one of the cases by the Rajasthan High Court and decided to consolidate the matter by transferring the remaining case from the Delhi High Court to itself.

The court’s decision was primarily based on the legal question of whether there should be a uniform age of marriage, with factual aspects of the case playing a minor role.

The Supreme Court decided to transfer the case to itself to ensure a comprehensive and consistent adjudication of the matter.

The Court’s decision was driven by the need to address the core legal issue of uniformity in marriage age.

The court did not discuss any alternative interpretations in this order.

The Supreme Court’s decision was to transfer the case to itself.

The order does not contain any direct quotes.

There were no majority or minority opinions in this order.

The order does not introduce any new doctrines or legal principles.

Key Takeaways

• ✓ The Supreme Court has taken up the issue of uniform marriage age for men and women.
• ✓ The case will now be heard directly by the Supreme Court.
• ✓ This decision indicates the Court’s willingness to address gender-based disparities in personal laws.

Directions

The Supreme Court directed that the case, now transferred, be listed on 13 February 2023.

Development of Law

The ratio decidendi of the case is that the Supreme Court has taken cognizance of the issue of uniform marriage age and has transferred the case to itself for adjudication. This indicates a move towards potentially addressing gender disparities in marriage laws. There is no change in the previous position of law, rather it is a procedural order.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court of India, in Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay Etc. v. Union of India and Others, transferred a case from the Delhi High Court to itself to address the issue of uniformity in the minimum age of marriage for men and women. This decision indicates the Court’s intent to examine the existing laws and potentially bring about a change to ensure gender equality in marriage laws.

Category

Parent Category: Constitutional Law
Child Category: Equality before Law
Child Category: Gender Justice
Parent Category: Personal Law
Child Category: Marriage Laws
Parent Category: Constitution of India
Child Category: Article 14, Constitution of India

FAQ

Q: What is the main issue in this case?
A: The main issue is whether the minimum age of marriage should be the same for men and women across all laws in India.

Q: Why did the Supreme Court transfer the case to itself?
A: The Supreme Court transferred the case to ensure a comprehensive and consistent adjudication of the matter.

Q: What are the potential implications of this case?
A: This case could lead to a uniform minimum age of marriage for men and women, promoting gender equality.