⚖️ Mehakpreet v. State of Punjab (Punjab & Haryana High Court, 14 July 2022)
CRWP-6703 of 2022 (O&M) | Hon’ble Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj
📚 Citation: Law Finder Doc Id # 2026212
💠 Judgment Essence — “Minor in Live-In Relationship Deserves Protection of Life & Liberty”
This landmark ruling holds that a minor’s fundamental right to life and personal liberty (Article 21) cannot be taken away merely because the individual is below marriageable age.
If a minor is in a live-in relationship or chooses to stay with someone by their own will, the Court must ensure safety and protection while strictly following child-protection laws under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 and POCSO Act, 2012.
🧭 Case Overview
👩⚖️ Petitioner No. 1 — a minor girl — sought protection from threats by family members. She wished to study further and later marry by her own choice after turning 18.
The Court reaffirmed that validity of marriage cannot override the constitutional right to life and dignity.
⚖️ Court’s Key Observations
✨ 1️⃣ Right to Life & Liberty = Absolute Protection
Even if the relationship is not legally recognized due to age, the State must guarantee security under Article 21.
✨ 2️⃣ Role of Child Welfare Committee (CWC)
The minor’s residence and welfare must be decided by the CWC, ensuring safety, education, and well-being under the JJ Act 2015.
✨ 3️⃣ No Self-Declared Guardian
Simply sheltering a child does not make someone a guardian. Guardianship exists only through law or court declaration.
✨ 4️⃣ JJ Act Complements Article 21
Referring the minor to CWC is a protective action — not a restriction — to uphold both child safety and constitutional liberty.
📜 Court Directions
1️⃣ Minor to be produced before CWC by a Child Welfare Police Officer.
2️⃣ CWC to inquire and issue orders under Sections 36 & 37 JJ Act.
3️⃣ Police protection to be given to both the minor and her companion.
4️⃣ Timeline: Petitioners to appear before SSP/SP within 3 days; if not, police must ensure production before CWC within 1 week.
5️⃣ Compliance report to be filed before the High Court.
📖 Authority: Law Finder Doc Id # 2026212
💬 Highlights
✅ A minor’s right to protection exists even if marriage is legally void.
✅ CWC determines safe custody and welfare.
✅ Consent of a minor is immaterial under POCSO Act 2012.
✅ The Court balances freedom with child-protection responsibilities.
📚 Legal References
📘 Article 21, Constitution of India — Right to Life & Liberty
📘 Hindu Minority & Guardianship Act, 1956 — Guardianship Rules
📘 Guardians & Wards Act, 1890 — Court-appointed Guardians
📘 Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 — Sections 2(14)(vii)(xii), 36, 37
📘 POCSO Act, 2012 — Protection of children under 18
🕊️ Court’s Message
“Every minor has a constitutional right to safety, dignity, and education.
The Court must act as guardian (parens patriae) to ensure both liberty and lawful protection.”
🏛️ Important Judgments Cited
- Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma, (2013) 15 SCC 755
- Ravneet Kaur v. State of Punjab, 2021 (4) RCR (Criminal) 140
- Pardeep Kumar Singh v. State of Haryana, 2008 (3) RCR (Criminal) 376
- Neetu Singh v. State (Delhi), 1999 (1) PLR 47
⚖️ Final Insight
❤️ Right to Protection – YES
🚫 Right to Live-in as Marriage – NO
The judgment creates harmony between individual freedom and child welfare, ensuring that minors receive both protection and guidance through legal channels.
📞 Need Legal Help or Protection Guidance?
Contact Delhi Law Firm® — All India Legal Services
📞 Helpline: 9990649999 | ☎️ Phone: 011-45108389
🌐 Website: https://delhilawfirm.in
💬 Delhi Law Firm® – You Can Trust.