The Jodhpur bench of the Rajasthan High Court dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed by a man. He claimed his live-in partner, allegedly his real sister, was illegally detained by her husband. The court ruled that the petition had no merit. It emphasized that no one has a fundamental right to maintain a live-in relationship with a woman legally married to another man. The court also noted that the woman appeared to be the petitioner’s sister.
Court Rejects Petition as Baseless
The bench, consisting of Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Madan Gopal Vyas, stated that the Indian Constitution does not support immoral acts. The judges clarified that courts cannot use the writ of habeas corpus to legitimize societal immorality. The court also imposed a Rs. 10,000 cost on the petitioner for filing a baseless petition.
The judges ruled that Article 21 of the Indian Constitution does not protect immoral or unlawful relationships. This includes a live-in relationship between a man and a woman married to another man, especially if the woman is his sister.
Constitutional Morality Does Not Apply
The court rejected the petitioner’s argument based on the 2018 Supreme Court ruling in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India. The judges clarified that this case did not validate relationships like the one in question. The court also ruled that the relationship lacked legal sanctity and was void under Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act.
The petitioner cited previous cases like Leela & Anr. v State of Rajasthan and Devu G Nair v State of Kerala. However, the court dismissed these references, stating that they did not apply to a live-in relationship between a brother and sister.
Court Upholds Societal Morality
The court ruled that the petitioner had no legal standing to file the habeas corpus petition. It emphasized that constitutional protections against unlawful detention do not apply to immoral relationships. The judges reaffirmed that societal morality plays a key role in judicial decisions.
