New Delhi, Aug 19 (IANS) Priyank Kanoongo, the former chairperson of National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) on Tuesday expressed ‘shock and surprise’ over a ruling by the Supreme Court which held the marriage of a minor Muslim girl under the Muslim Personal Law, as valid.

Kanoongo, currently a member of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), took to social media handle X and said “this was akin to running the country on the basis of Sharia.”

He said that the court considered the consent of minors as the basis but ignored the laid down guidelines of the POCSO Act, a law enacted by the Parliament that protects children from offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography.

Terming the ruling as “concerning”, he informed that another similar case was scheduled for hearing on Wednesday and this has left him worried.

“If children are given the consent to engage in sex, it will lead to ruin. God should protect the children of India,” he said in the post.

According to a leading law portal, the Apex Court on Tuesday dismissed a Special Leave Petition filed by the NCPCR challenging the 2022 judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which held that a 16-year-old Muslim girl can enter into a valid marriage with a Muslim man and granted protection to the couple from threats.

The NCPCR counsel raised objections to the judgment, but it was turned down by the court on the grounds that it was stranger to the litigation and has no locus standi to challenge the High Court order.

The High Court had granted protection to the couple noting that the girl, who attained puberty, is of marriageable age under the Muslim Personal Law.

Priyank Kanoongo, in his X post, further informed that he had challenged the High Court verdict in the Supreme Court, following which a stay order was given.

While he helmed the NCPCR, the child rights body in its appeal said that under the POCSO, physical relations with a minor is a crime and allowing the sexual exploitation of minor girls based on religion is against the constitutional principles of secularism.

–IANS

mr/rad