LAWS(UTN)-2020-6-26

MADHU BALA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ORS.

Decided On June 12, 2020
MADHU BALA Appellant
V/S
State of Uttarakhand And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter is heard through video conferencing.

(2.) The petitioner had filed the present writ petition invoking the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus on the ground that the detenue Meenakshi, who is a qualified lady and major, has been wrongfully confined by respondent nos. 4 and 5, who are the mother and brother respectively against her wishes, of the detenue. Though despite the fact that, she is a major and she has been enjoying a consensual relationship with the petitioner since 2016; and under the settled legal preposition as laid down by the different High Courts of the country, a consensual relationship between a common sex is not barred and it is held not to be an offence under the law. Hence, the continuance of a consensual relationship between the persons belonging to the same sex is not in debate in the present writ petition anymore at present.

(3.) Incidentally the question, which arises in this writ petition filed for seeking a writ of habeas corpus is to the effect that whether two adult persons of same gender can be permitted to be in a relationship and further whether they can be permitted to live together, which is a wider a question already raised before various High Courts of the country involving a consideration of a question as to whether the liberty of a person, who had attained majority can be curtailed and one of the leading judgments on this aspect is that of as reported in AIR 2018 SC 346 'Soni Gerry vs. Gerry Douglas', wherein, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that "it needs no special emphasis to state that attaining the age of majority in an individual's life has its own significance. He or she is entitled to make his or her choice. The court can, so long as the choice remains, assume the role of parnis patriae.The daughter is entitled to enjoy her freedom as the law permits and the courts shall not assume the role of a super guardian being moved by any kind of sentiments of the mother or egotism of the father. We say so without any reservations."