New Delhi:The Supreme Court Wednesday termed the detention of a woman by her parents as "illegal" and directed them to "set her at liberty forthwith". The apex court said the woman is permitted to proceed further as per her own wishes and stressed, "when the question of liberty of a person is involved even a day's delay counts", while acting on a plea by the woman's Dubai-based relationship partner.
A bench comprising Justices B R Gavai and Sandeep Mehta passed the order on a plea by Kevin Joy Varghese, who moved the apex court challenging an order passed by Karnataka High Court on November 29, 2023.
The apex court noted that the petitioner's partner is a grown-up girl aged about 25 years and highly qualified. "We have personally interacted with her in chambers on three occasions. In the intervals we had interactions with her parents as well as the parents of the petitioner….. Interaction with her showed that she is mature enough to understand as to what is right and what is wrong for her in her life. In any case a major girl cannot be compelled to do something against her wishes”, said the bench, in its order.
The apex court also expressed its anguish at the manner in which the High Court of Karnataka has dealt with the present matter. “When in a habeas corpus petition the detenue had in unequivocal terms expressed before the High Court that she desired to go back to Dubai to pursue her career, the High Court ought to have passed the order setting her at liberty with immediate effect. Adjourning the matter on fourteen occasions and now postponing it indefinitely and posting it in the year 2025 depicts a total lack of sensitivity on the part of the High Court in such a matter," observed the bench.
The apex court said as a matter of fact, not passing appropriate orders at appropriate stage has contributed to further illegal detention of the detenue. "Because of such lackadaisical approach, the petitioner and his parents have been compelled to make frequent trips from Dubai to Bengaluru just to ensure the well being of the detenue. When the question of liberty of a person is involved even a day's delay counts," said the bench.
Noting that the woman being a mature major girl, desires to go with the parents of the petitioner, the apex court said: "We hold that the continued detention of respondent No.7 (woman) by respondent Nos.4 and 5 (parents) is illegal. Hence respondent Nos.4 and 5 shall set her at liberty forthwith and she is permitted to proceed further as per her own wishes".
The bench also directed the woman's parents to return the passport/documents/belongings to her within a period of 48 hours from now, and the parents will hand it over to the Inspector of Police, J.P. Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru. "Needless to state that disobedience of any of the aforesaid directions by respondent Nos.4 and 5 would entail initiation of suo motu contempt proceedings against them," said the bench, scheduling the matter for further hearing on January 22, for reporting compliance.
The woman's parents had contended that they are not opposed to the wishes of their daughter, and added that taking into consideration the present-day scenario in the society, they desire that their daughter should be financially stable before she takes a decision about her life. The parents said once she is financially stable, she is free to take whatever decisions she desires and they further stated that they are concerned about the security of their only child.
The bench noted that the woman had emphatically stated that though she has all the love, respect and affection for her parents, she would like to go back to Dubai and pursue her career. "She further stated that though on three occasions she had got interview calls from Dubai for different jobs, she could not attend the same, as she was under detention of her parents. She further submitted that since all important documents including the passport are in the custody of her parents, her position is almost like house arrest," noted the bench, in its order.
Varghese said that they were studying together at Dubai, and knew each other for the last nine years and they have been in a relationship since 2022. "It is the contention of the petitioner that respondent Nos.4 and 5, after coming to know about the relationship of the petitioner with respondent no.7, forcibly took respondent no.7 from Dubai and are illegally detaining her in Bengaluru at her uncle's house. It is contended that her devices, passport, belongings and other articles have been taken away from her to prevent her from pursuing her career at Dubai," noted the bench.
Read more:
- Sena vs Sena squabble: SC to hear on Jan 22 UBT-led Shiv Sena's plea against Speaker’s decision
- 'If not resolved, we will lay down law': SC to Centre
