Same sex couples can constitute a family: Madras High Court
Though the Supreme Court may not have legalised marriage between
same sex couples
, they can very well form a family, the
Madras High Court
has held and allowed a young woman to join her female partner and said the two women can constitute a family.
A division bench of Justices G R Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan said the expression "family" has to be understood in an expanded sense. Hearing a writ petition seeking to produce before court a 25-year old woman and set her at liberty, the bench said: "To a specific question from us, the detenue (the 25-year old woman) replied that she is a lesbian and in relationship with the writ petitioner."
She made it clear to the court that she wanted to go with the petitioner. She confirmed the allegation that she is being detained against her will by her natal family.
"It appeared that she was forcibly taken to her home and beaten. She told us that her natal family members forced her to undergo certain rituals so that she will become "normal". She even apprehended danger to her life."
In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner has nowhere described the true nature of her relationship with the detenue." Even in her complaint to the police, the petitioner called herself as the detenue's close friend. We can understand the hesitation on her part."
Live Events
Further, the court said: "While Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty Vs Union of India (Supreme Court) may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples, they can very well form a family. Marriage is not the sole mode to found a family."
The concept of "chosen family" is now well settled and acknowledged in LGBTQIA+ jurisprudence, the court said adding the petitioner and the detenue can very well constitute a family.
Justice Anand Venkatesh, Judge of Madras HC, in Prasanna J Vs S Sushma approved a "Deed of familial Association" that purported to recognise the civil union entered into between LGBTQAI+ partners.
The Supreme Court, in NALSA and Navtej Johar case, declared that sexual orientation is a matter of individual choice and that it is one of the most basic aspects of self-determination, dignity and freedom. It is an integral part of personal autonomy and self-expression and falls within the realm of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The High Court, in its judgment dated May 22, 2025 said: "Since we have satisfied ourselves that the detenue wants to join the petitioner and that she is being detained against her will, we allow this Habeas Corpus petition and set her at liberty. We also restrain the detenue's natal family members from interfering with her personal liberty."
Also, the court directed the police to provide protection to the detenue as well as the petitioner as and when required.
Economic Times WhatsApp channel
)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
24 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Kilmar Abrego Garcia returned to the US, charged with transporting people in the country illegally
WASHINGTON — Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose mistaken deportation to El Salvador became a political flashpoint in the Trump administration's stepped-up immigration enforcement, was returned to the United States on Friday to face criminal charges related to what the Trump administration said was a massive human smuggling operation that brought immigrants into the country illegally. His abrupt release from El Salvador closes one chapter and opens another in a saga that yielded a remarkable, months-long standoff between Trump officials and the courts over a deportation that officials initially acknowledged was done in error but then continued to stand behind in apparent defiance of orders by judges to facilitate his return to the U.S. The development occurred after U.S. officials presented El Salvador President Nayib Bukele with an arrest warrant for federal charges in Tennessee accusing Abrego Garcia of playing a key role in smuggling immigrants into the country for money. He is expected to be prosecuted in the U.S. and, if convicted, will be returned to his home country of El Salvador at the conclusion of the case, officials said Friday. 'This is what American justice looks like,' Attorney General Pam Bondi said in announcing Abrego Garcia's return and the unsealing of a grand jury indictment. A court appearance in Nashville was set for Friday. Democrats and immigrant rights group had pressed for Abrego Garcia's release, with several lawmakers — including Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, where Abrego Garcia had lived for years — even traveling to El Salvador to visit him. A federal judge had ordered him to be returned in April and the Supreme Court rejected an emergency appeal by directing the government to work to bring him back. But the news that Abrego Garcia, who had an immigration court order preventing his deportation to his native country over fears he would face persecution from local gangs, was being brought back for the purpose of prosecution was greeted with dismay by his lawyers. 'The government disappeared Kilmar to a foreign prison in violation of a court order. Now, after months of delay and secrecy, they're bringing him back, not to correct their error but to prosecute him. This shows that they were playing games with the court all along,' said one of his lawyers, Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg. The indictment, filed last month and unsealed Friday, lays out a string of allegations that date back to 2016 but are only being disclosed now, nearly three months after Abrego Garcia was mistakenly deported and following the Trump administration's repeated claims that he is a criminal. It accuses him of smuggling throughout the U.S. thousands of people living in the country illegally, including members of the violent MS-13 gang, from Central America and abusing women he was transporting. A co-conspirator also alleged that he participated in the killing of a gang member's mother in El Salvador, prosecutors wrote in papers urging the judge to keep him behind bars while he awaits trial. The indictment does not charge him in connection with that allegation. 'Later, as part of his immigration proceedings in the United States, the defendant claimed he could not return to El Salvador because he was in fear of retribution from the 18th Street gang,' the detention memo states. 'While partially true — the defendant, according to the information received by the Government, was in fear of retaliation by the 18th Street gang — the underlying reason for the retaliation was the defendant's own actions in participating in the murder of a rival 18th Street gang member's mother," prosecutors wrote. The charges stem from a 2022 vehicle stop in which the Tennessee Highway Patrol suspected him of human trafficking. A report released by the Department of Homeland Security in April states that none of the people in the vehicle had luggage, while they listed the same address as Abrego Garcia. Abrego Garcia was never charged with a crime, while the officers allowed him to drive on with only a warning about an expired driver's license, according to the DHS report. The report said he was traveling from Texas to Maryland, via Missouri, to bring in people to perform construction work. In response to the report's release in April, Abrego Garcia's wife said in a statement that he sometimes transported groups of workers between job sites, 'so it's entirely plausible he would have been pulled over while driving with others in the vehicle. He was not charged with any crime or cited for any wrongdoing.' Abrego Garcia's background and personal life have been a source of dispute and contested facts. Immigrant rights advocates have cast his arrest as emblematic of an administration whose deportation policy is haphazard and error-prone, while Trump officials have pointed to prior interactions with police and described him as a gang member who fits the mold they are determined to expel from the country. Abrego Garcia lived in the U.S. for roughly 14 years, during which he worked construction, got married and was raising three children with disabilities, according to court records. Trump administration officials said he was deported based on a 2019 accusation from Maryland police that he was an MS-13 gang member. Abrego Garcia denied the allegation and was never charged with a crime, his attorneys said. A U.S. immigration judge subsequently shielded Abrego Garcia from deportation to El Salvador because he likely faced persecution there by local gangs. The Trump administration deported him there in March, later describing the mistake as 'an administrative error' but insisting he was in MS-13. Abrego Garcia's return comes days after the Trump administration complied with a court order to return a Guatemalan man deported to Mexico despite his fears of being harmed there. The man, identified in court papers as O.C.G, was the first person known to have been returned to U.S. custody after deportation since the start of President Donald Trump's second term.
Time of India
30 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Victims' can challenge acquittal under Sec 372 CrPC: Supreme Court
NEW DELHI: Referring to provision of Section 372 of CrPC which was amended in 2009 on recommendation of Law Commission to allow a victim to file appeal, Supreme Court has held that a "victim" of an offence like in cheque bouncing cases has the right to challenge the order of acquittal of the accused under CrPC and corresponding Section 413 of BNSS. Differentiating between Sec 372 & Sec 378 (which allows a complainant to file appeal), a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Sharma said Section 378 circumcised the right to file an appeal which is not the case with Section 372. "The proviso to Sec 372 of CrPC was inserted in statute book with effect from 31.12.2009. The object and reason for such insertion must be realised and must be given its full effect to by a court. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold that the victim of an offence has the right to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of CrPC, irrespective of whether he is a complainant or not. Even if the victim of an offence is a complainant, he can still proceed under the proviso to Section 372 and need not advert to sub-section (4) of Section 378 of CrPC, SC said victim of a crime must have an absolute right to prefer an appeal which cannot be circumscribed by any condition and the right of a victim of a crime must be placed on par with right of an accused who after being convicted has a right to file an appeal under Section 374 of CrPC. TNN
Time of India
33 minutes ago
- Time of India
UP CM adviser holds talks with Goswami community over Banke Bihari Corridor
Agra: Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath's adviser Awanish Kumar Awasthi on Friday, chaired a meeting at the tourist facilitation centre in Vrindavan, to discuss issues related to the proposed Banke Bihari Corridor with members of the Goswami community involved in the management of the temple, local shopkeepers and residents. Speaking to media persons after the meeting, Awasthi said the proposed project aims to enhance facilities for pilgrims, and efficiently manage the increasing pilgrim footfall in the Mathura-Vrindavan area. "The number of pilgrims visiting the area is rising exponentially. Today's meeting focused on how to effectively cater to this surge while ensuring public confidence and participation in the planning process. This was the first round of discussions, and it was very productive," he said. On concerns raised by the Goswami community regarding the project, Awasthi said several suggestions had been put forth during the meeting. "The district magistrate and other officials will carefully evaluate these inputs. The state govt aims to proceed with the most inclusive and best possible option to take the project forward," Awasthi said. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like American Investor Warren Buffett Recommends: 5 Books For Turning Your Life Around Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo Established in 1862 in the heart of Vrindavan, the Shri Banke Bihari temple is administered by Shebaits — a hereditary priesthood responsible for daily rituals and temple management. It remains one of North India's most visited pilgrimage sites. The Supreme Court's May 15 verdict came amid ongoing protests by members of the Goswami community and local residents, who have opposed both the corridor project and the formation of Banke Bihari Temple Trust. The court's decision, delivered by a bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and SC Sharma, cleared the way for the govt to move ahead with its Rs 500 crore redevelopment plan, which includes acquiring nearly five acres of land near the shrine, using temple funds. Calls for redevelopment intensified after a stampede-like incident during Janmashtami celebrations in 2022, left two dead. In Sept 2023, the Allahabad high court directed the state govt to implement a corridor plan for improved crowd management and safety. While officials claim stakeholders were consulted, Shebaits and local residents have alleged they were excluded from the planning process. Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Eid wishes , messages , and quotes !
