Court allows adult woman to live with same-sex partner in habeas corpus case, reaffirming autonomy under Article 21.
Court & Bench
The ruling was delivered by the Andhra Pradesh High Court. A Division Bench comprising Justice R. Raghunandan Rao and Justice Maheshwara Kuncheam decided the matter in December 2024 while hearing a habeas corpus petition.
Case Title: Chadalavada Pallavi v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Others
Legal Issue
The central question before the Court was whether the parents of an adult woman could restrict her freedom to live with a partner of her choice, particularly in a same-sex relationship. The petition sought the production and release of a woman allegedly detained by her family against her wishes. The case raised issues relating to personal liberty, autonomy of adults, and the right to choose a partner, which are protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Case Background
The habeas corpus petition was filed by a woman who claimed that her partner had been forcibly taken away and confined by her parents due to their disapproval of the relationship. According to the petitioner, the couple had been living together in a relationship, but family opposition resulted in the alleged detention of the partner. The petitioner approached the High Court seeking directions to the police to produce her partner before the Court and ensure her release from what she described as unlawful confinement. Earlier, the Court directed the authorities to produce the woman before the Bench. When she appeared, the judges interacted with her in chambers to ascertain her wishes regarding where she wanted to reside. During this interaction, the woman clearly stated that she was a major and wanted to live with the petitioner. She also expressed that she did not wish to pursue any criminal complaint against her family members.
Court’s Observations
The Bench emphasized that once a person has attained the age of majority, they possess the autonomy to make decisions about their personal life. The Court observed that neither parents nor relatives can restrain a major individual from deciding where and with whom to live. The judges reiterated that the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 includes the freedom to choose a partner and determine one’s personal relationships.
The Court noted that family disapproval or societal pressure cannot override the legal autonomy of adults. Consequently, any attempt to forcibly confine an adult woman or prevent her from exercising her choice would violate her fundamental rights.
Final Ruling
Allowing the habeas corpus petition, the High Court held that the woman, being a major, was free to decide her place of residence and her partner. The Court directed the police to ensure that she could safely go with the petitioner and reside wherever she chose. The Bench further clarified that the woman’s family members cannot interfere with her decision to live with her partner. At the same time, the Court noted the woman’s statement that she did not wish to pursue criminal action against her parents and ordered that no proceedings be initiated against them regarding the dispute up to that date.
Practical Implications
The ruling reinforces judicial recognition of adult autonomy in matters of relationships and cohabitation. It also clarifies that parental authority cannot override the constitutional rights of major individuals. The judgment may guide police authorities and lower courts when dealing with cases involving alleged family detention of adult individuals due to inter-caste, inter-faith, or same-sex relationships. It also reiterates that habeas corpus can be used as a remedy when an adult claims unlawful confinement by family members. By affirming that adults can choose their partners irrespective of gender and live together without interference, the decision strengthens constitutional protections relating to personal liberty and dignity.
The judgment adds clarity on the constitutional protection of an adult’s right to choose a partner and live according to their personal decisions without family interference.
