KOCHI: Parental love cannot be allowed to fluster the right of an adult to choose whom she marries, the high court ruled in a habeas corpus petition. The bench of Justices V Raja Vijayaraghavan and P M Manoj also emphasized a woman‘s legal right to marry whomever she wishes.
The bench considered a plea by a Kollam native, alleging that his lover, a native of Thrissur, was illegally detained by her parents.He added that he was in a relationship with her and that they belonged to different religions. Previously, while considering the plea, the division bench ordered the police to produce the detenu in court.
When appeared in court, the detenu, a 27-year-old woman, stated that she was being held illegally and wished to go with the petitioner. However, the bench disposed of the petition based on the observation of the apex court in the Shafin Jahan case, which stated that “The role of the court is to ensure that the detenu is produced before it, ascertain his/her independent choice, and ensure that the person is released from illegal restraint. What is seminal is to remember that the song of liberty must be sung with sincerity, and the choice of an individual must be appropriately respected and granted its esteemed status, as the Constitution guarantees.”
Similarly, the Bench quoted the words from the apex court judgment in the Anuj Garg and Others case: “It is their life; subject to the constitutional, statutory, and social interdicts – a citizen of India should be allowed to live her life on her own terms.”
The division bench finally stated that, as she alleged, she was illegally confined against her will by her parents, the petition was to be allowed, and she was permitted to go with the petitioner.
The bench considered a plea by a Kollam native, alleging that his lover, a native of Thrissur, was illegally detained by her parents.He added that he was in a relationship with her and that they belonged to different religions. Previously, while considering the plea, the division bench ordered the police to produce the detenu in court.
When appeared in court, the detenu, a 27-year-old woman, stated that she was being held illegally and wished to go with the petitioner. However, the bench disposed of the petition based on the observation of the apex court in the Shafin Jahan case, which stated that “The role of the court is to ensure that the detenu is produced before it, ascertain his/her independent choice, and ensure that the person is released from illegal restraint. What is seminal is to remember that the song of liberty must be sung with sincerity, and the choice of an individual must be appropriately respected and granted its esteemed status, as the Constitution guarantees.”
Similarly, the Bench quoted the words from the apex court judgment in the Anuj Garg and Others case: “It is their life; subject to the constitutional, statutory, and social interdicts – a citizen of India should be allowed to live her life on her own terms.”
The division bench finally stated that, as she alleged, she was illegally confined against her will by her parents, the petition was to be allowed, and she was permitted to go with the petitioner.
