The Madhya Pradesh High Court has upheld an adult woman’s choice to live and work in Mumbai, dismissing a habeas corpus petition after she told the Court she was not confined, while advising her not to break her ties with her parents.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Gwalior: The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Gwalior has dismissed a habeas corpus petition concerning an adult woman living in Mumbai, after she told the Court by video conference that she had gone to Mumbai voluntarily, had secured a job and was not under any illegal confinement, and has granted her liberty to live her life as per her own wishes [Habeas corpus petition concerning an adult woman v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others].
A Division Bench of Justice G. S. Ahluwalia and Justice Anuradha Shukla passed the order on October 6, 2026. In the same order, the Bench advised the woman not to break her ties completely with her parents.
The case
When the matter was called, the State informed the Court that the woman had filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court seeking protection of her life, liberty, dignity and personal safety, and a declaration that, being a major adult, she is entitled, subject to law, to decide her own place of residence, education, profession, association, personal relationships and matrimonial future. The petition also sought a direction to the Mumbai police authorities to ensure that she is not forcibly taken, confined with or handed over to her father.
The State counsel could not find any record of that petition on the Bombay High Court website. After the matter was passed over, the State informed the Court that the counsel who was to file it had said it had not yet been filed but would be filed during the day. The State also told the Court that bank records showed the woman had transferred money to an advocate, and that the advocate had emailed a draft of the petition to the police. The draft, which the Court took on record, showed that it was prepared on September 29, 2026.
What the woman told the Court
The woman joined the proceedings by video conference through an advocate in Mumbai after the Bench directed that her counsel appear in that manner. She submitted that she had come to Mumbai of her own accord and had secured a job, and that she was not in illegal confinement. Her father, who was present in Court, raised a concern about her medical treatment and asked that she continue it if she was unwilling to return home.
The woman responded that she had consulted a doctor, who told her that a Court order would be needed for any evaluation of her condition. She said she would seek such a direction in her Bombay High Court petition and would continue any treatment found necessary, and that if she felt she should return to her parents she would do so on her own independent decision.
The Bench recorded that this Court had told her she could make a prayer for such evaluation in the Bombay petition. It also noted that the draft petition had remained unfiled for a week even though a large amount of fees had been transferred to her counsel, and observed that why the petition was being kept pending was not known.
ALSO READ: Adult Woman Free To Join Husband, Family Can’t Force Her: Patna High Court
What the Court said
Recording that the woman had said she was residing in Mumbai out of her own volition and was not in illegal confinement, and that she is an advocate by profession, the Bench held:
this Court is of the considered opinion that no case is made out to proceed further with this petition.
The Bench dismissed the petition, with liberty to the woman to live her life as per her own wishes. It also said that she must remain vigilant about her security, given that the petition prepared on September 29 was still unfiled on October 6.
The advice to the woman
The Bench added a word of advice, recorded in the following terms:
this Court would like to give an advice to the corpus that she should not break her ties completely with her parents and whenever she finds herself in a vulnerable condition or whenever she finds that the help of her parents is required, then she should not hesitate in contacting back her parents or coming back to her parental home.
ALSO READ: “No Law Stops an Adult Woman From Living With a Married Man”: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Why the order matters
In habeas corpus proceedings the question before a court is whether the person concerned is in illegal detention. Once an adult, produced before the Court, says that she is living where she is by choice and is free to leave, that inquiry is at an end, and the Bench acted on that footing while leaving it to her to decide whether to return home.
The order separates the legal question from the family one. The dismissal rests on her voluntary residence, while the closing advice is not a direction and carries no legal compulsion. The Court made no finding on any other dispute between the woman and her family, and her request for an evaluation was left to the Bombay High Court proceedings.
Case Title: Habeas corpus petition concerning an adult woman v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others [Writ Petition No. 41928 of 2026]
Neutral Citation: 2026:MPHC-GWL:30562
Bench: Justice G. S. Ahluwalia and Justice Anuradha Shukla, Madhya Pradesh High Court at Gwalior
Date of Order: October 6, 2026
Appearances: Advocates H.K. Shukla and Rajeev Shrivastava for the petitioner; Dr. Anjali Gyanani, Public Prosecutor, for the State