The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that a major woman has the right to live according to her own wishes and cannot be unlawfully detained by police. However, the Court clarified that she cannot reside as the wife of a man who is below the legally prescribed marriageable age.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that, while a major woman has the right to live according to her own preferences and cannot be unlawfully detained by the police, she cannot be allowed to stay with a man in the capacity of his wife if he is below the legally prescribed marriageable age.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Pranay Verma and Justice Jai Kumar Pillai passed the order while hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by Ritesh Katara. In his petition, Katara alleged that a woman referred to in the proceedings as the “corpus” was his legally wedded wife and that she was being illegally held by the police authorities.
The petition was moved under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking the production and release of the woman. Katara claimed that he had married the corpus and that she was confined without legal justification. However, during the proceedings, the Court identified a key legal obstacle: the petitioner himself was only 20 years old. The Bench held that, given the petitioner’s age, the alleged marriage could not be accorded legal recognition.
The Court specifically recorded that
“the petitioner himself is aged 20 years hence his alleged marriage with the corpus cannot be granted legal recognition.”
Pursuant to an earlier order dated June 1, 2026, the State produced the woman before the Court. She was brought before the Bench by Lady Constable Kavita Bhatia and the Station House Officer of Khachrod Police Station, Dhan Singh. The judges personally interacted with the woman to ascertain her wishes. The corpus told the Court that she wanted to go with the petitioner. Despite her preference, the Court observed that the legal implications of the petitioner’s age could not be overlooked.
The Bench noted that although the corpus expressed her desire to accompany Katara,
“the fact remains that the petitioner is not of a marriagable age, hence corpus cannot be permitted to be sent with him.”
At the same time, the Court reaffirmed the woman’s autonomy and personal liberty. It emphasised that because the corpus was a major, she had the right to decide where and with whom she wished to live, and she could not be subjected to unlawful detention by any authority, including the police.
In doing so, the Court observed:
“considering the fact that the corpus is major she certainly has a right to live as per her wishes and cannot be illegally detained by the Police authorities.”
Accordingly, the Court balanced the woman’s personal freedom with the legal restriction against recognising the claimed marital relationship. It directed that the woman would remain free to live wherever she wished, while clarifying that this would not include residing with the petitioner as his wife.
The order stated that
“the corpus would be free to reside as per her wishes but the same would not mean residing with the petitioner as the wife.”
To protect her safety and support her choice, the Court further instructed the police officers who had produced her before the Bench to escort her to the location where she wished to go. With these observations and directions, the writ petition was disposed of.
For the petitioner, Advocate Harshwardhan Singh Rathore appeared, while Government Advocate Aditya Garg represented the State authorities.
Case Title: Ritesh Katara v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE