The Madras High Court upheld the rights of a same-sex couple, criticizing societal conservatism and police inaction. The court emphasized that personal liberty cannot be denied due to lack of parental support.
Chennai: Today, on June 04, In a strong and compassionate decision, the Madras High Court recently stood up for the rights of LGBTQIA+ individuals, stating that societal conservatism cannot be a reason for the police to ignore the safety of same-sex couples.
The Division Bench, consisting of Justices G.R. Swaminathan and V. Lakshminarayanan, made these observations while hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by a 25-year-old woman from Tirupattur.
ALSO READ: LGBTQIA+ Rights In India & Many More: Landmark Judgments By CJI DY Chandrachud
She had approached the court seeking the release of her partner, who was being held by her own parents at their home in Vellore district against her will.
Both the petitioner and the detainee are adults. During the court proceedings, the detained woman confirmed that her parents had kept her confined in their house against her wishes.
The judges allowed her to go with the petitioner, respecting her decision and autonomy. As a gesture of personal support, Justice Swaminathan even gave Rs 1,000 from his own money to help the couple with their travel expenses.
The court also discussed the use of the word “queer” while referring to people from the LGBTQIA+ community. The judges expressed their discomfort with the term, pointing out that it is often defined in dictionaries as meaning “strange or odd.”
They noted that such meanings could carry a negative connotation and might not be appropriate to describe someone’s natural and normal sexual orientation or gender identity.
As the court said,
“We feel certain discomfort in employing the expression ‘queer.’ Any standard dictionary defines this word as meaning ‘strange or odd.’ To a homosexual individual, his/her/their sexual orientation must be perfectly natural and normal… Why then should they be called queer?”
The judges did not stop there. They criticized the actions of the local police, who had earlier forced the detainee to go back with her parents when a complaint was first made.
The court emphasized that government officials, especially the police, are legally bound to take proper action whenever any LGBTQIA+ individual reports harassment or threats.
To ensure that the couple remains protected, the Bench passed an important order.
It said,
“We also restrain the detenu’s natal family members from interfering with her personal liberty. We issue a writ of continuing mandamus to the jurisdictional police to afford adequate protection to the detenue as well as the petitioner as and when required.”
The court acknowledged that despite their best efforts, they were unable to convince the detainee’s parents to accept their daughter’s same-sex relationship.
Still, the judges made it clear that the law is on the side of individual freedom and human rights.
They said,
“But the law is very clear. All individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation and gender identity, possess the right to universal enjoyment of human rights.”
Justice Swaminathan, who authored the verdict, made another powerful point in support of same-sex relationships and families.
He wrote,
“Same-sex couples 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 petitioner and the detenue can very well constitute a family.”
The judges also praised the progressive work done by another judge of the Madras High Court, Justice N. Anand Venkatesh. He has been actively working to improve the lives of LGBTQIA+ people.
The Bench noted that Justice Venkatesh had recently approved a “deed of familial association”, a legal document that recognizes the civil union between two LGBTQIA+ partners.
Case Title:
M.A. v. State of Tamil Nadu & Others
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Tahawwur Rana’ Case
