جبکہ اس ججمنٹ میں لاھور ہائیکورٹ نے سولہ سال سے کم عمر لڑکی سے شادی غیر قانونی قرار دیتے ہوئے ضمانت خارج کردی

The State had since fixed the age of minority/majority to protect the minors through the provisions of the relevant laws, which are presently holding the field, the noncompliance whereof would amount to frustrate the object behind the laws. Implementation of the statutory provisions of Act of 1929, read with all other allied enactments made by the legislature, while giving it a preference over uncodified divergent opinions of religious scholars, by way of strict compliance with the provisions pertaining to fixation of sixteen years of age of female for her marriage, as aforesaid, shall enable the state to discharge its international obligations being signatory to the UNCRC besides providing safeguard to the female minors from infringement of their fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 4, 9, 14, 25 of the Constitution read with all other enabling provisions of law. It will also tend to create a sense of harmony with its consequential effect of definiteness about the law amongst various sections of the society.

To decide the fate of this petition, while weighing up the swinging contentions of parties projected through their counsels, on perusal of available record, it transpires that the age of alleged abductee, as per the medicolegal certificate issued by M.O, after her physical/medical examination, is 13/14 years. The acclaimed marriage of the petitioner with the abductee, refuted by her, prima facie has illegally been contracted in clear violation of the provisions of the Act of 1929, which unambiguously prescribes sixteen years of age as threshold to enter into a marriage contract by a female and violation thereof is punishable under Section 4 of the Act ibid with imprisonment of six month and fine 50,000/- rupees. According to the celebrated maxim “Jus ex injuria non oritur” a right does not arise from a wrong, the petitioner prima facie himself has not only violated law, but with the same stroke he has dislodged legal & constitutional protection available with the alleged abductee under Article 4 of the Constitution. Whereas, the petitioner was bound to follow & abide by law prescribing age of majority whilst entering into contract of marriage, which obligation otherwise is clearly cast upon him by the Constitution through Article 5 (2) stating that “obedience to the Constitution and law is inviolable obligation of every citizen whereever he may be and of every other person for the time being within Pakistan”. Moreover, as per section 375(d) PPC, the consent of a female below the age of sixteen years is otherwise immaterial.