The Allahabad High Court has dealt a blow to a group of men accused of repeatedly raping a minor girl under the guise of nikah halala, refusing to quash the FIR registered against them. The court made it clear that the POCSO Act stands above personal law, meaning no religious custom can be used to legally justify physical relations with a minor.
How The Case Unfolded
The case dates back to 2016, when the complainant was still a minor. She has alleged that nine men raped her repeatedly at the time in the name of nikah halala. Years later, in 2025, after she turned adult, she was allegedly gang-raped again, this time in the name of what has been described as double halala. The case was registered at Saidnagli police station in Amroha district under relevant sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, and the POCSO Act.
What The Petitioners Argued
Tayyab and three other accused had approached the High Court seeking to have the FIR against them quashed. Their counsel argued that in 2016, triple talaq under Sharia law was still in effect, and that nikah halala is a legitimate religious custom. Since the girl did not reject the marriage within a year of turning adult, the counsel contended, the marriage should be treated as valid, and the FIR should therefore be quashed.
The State And The Complainant Push Back
Countering this, lawyers for the Uttar Pradesh government and the complainant argued that the allegations plainly describe the sexual exploitation of a minor girl, followed by her gang rape under the guise of double halala once she turned adult. They submitted that personal law cannot be used as a shield to escape acts of gang rape under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Court's Sharp Observation
A bench of Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena, after hearing both sides, held that if physical relations are established with a minor girl under the guise of halala, the provisions of the POCSO Act will certainly apply, even if the girl later expressed a wish to remarry the man who had divorced her. The bench observed that, prima facie, this was a case of rape of a minor followed by an extremely brutal and gruesome gang rape carried out under the same guise. The court also cited the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Independent Thought vs Union of India, in which the top court gave primacy to the POCSO Act and ruled out any possibility of legally having physical relations with a girl below 18 years of age.
No Accused Gets A Free Pass
During the hearing, it was also argued that some of the accused, such as the qazi who solemnised the nikah and a few distant relatives, had played only a minor role in the case. The court rejected this argument outright, holding that all the accused were equally involved in this serious crime. In its verdict delivered on July 1, the bench made it clear that the allegations in this case require a thorough investigation by the police to establish the full facts.
