Woman has right to live freely; autonomy not defined by familial obligations: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently observed that a court’s role is not to enforce social norms or morality, but to uphold the principles of constitutional morality..Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul made the observation while dealing with a habeas corpus petition filed by a father for release of his daughter from alleged illegal custody of a man.However, the 30-year-old woman told the Court that she was living independently of her own will and did not want to return either to her father’s home or to her husband's, due to the violence she faced there..Counsel representing the father argued that the woman’s custody must be handed over to her father, considering the social concerns and potential consequences of her living independently.However, the Court observed that such a notion was a direct affront to the right to equality and personal liberty enshrined in the Constitution.“It is imperative to emphasize that once the alleged detenue, who is a fully mature adult, capable of making her own decisions, has clearly expressed her desire to live independently, this Court cannot override her will. The Writ of Habeas Corpus is a constitutional mechanism to protect the personal liberty of an individual, and the Court is constitutionally bound to uphold this right. It cannot, and should not, compel an adult to return to the custody of another, even if that person is a well-meaning parent,” said the Court. .The argument that a father would be a better custodian of an adult woman than herself was not only antiquated, but also runs contrary to the constitutional guarantee of personal liberty, Justice Kaul said further.“It is crucial to reaffirm that an adult woman, like any other citizen, possesses the right to be treated as an independent and autonomous individual, free from coercion and undue influence."The Court further stressed that the identity and autonomy of an adult woman are not defined by her relationships or familial obligations. “The Constitution safeguards her right to live freely and make her own choices, without external interference. The notion that her father, or anyone else, can impose their will upon her based on a perceived social role is a direct affront to the right of equality and personal liberty enshrined in our constitution,” the judge said..Thus, the Court said that it must ensure that the woman’s rights are protected and her autonomy is respected without yielding to extraneous considerations.“While the concerns of the petitioner, are understandable, they cannot override the alleged detenue’s constitutional rights to personal liberty,” the Court said, as it rejected the plea..The High Court had earlier asked the police to get the woman’s statement recorded before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh and ordered for her protection. On August 17, the woman was produced before the magistrate. The woman in her statement said she was safe where she was residing and did not intend to go to her father’s house. The woman, who has two children, further said she had left her husband’s house because of physical violence and then come to her father’s house, where her brothers would beat her. She then left from there also and came to Punjab.Counsel representing the father said that she had been brainwashed by another man and that her children were suffering due to her separation from her husband. Arguments were also made regarding the social reputation of the family. .However, the Court noted that the woman unequivocally has declared that she does not wish to return to her father. “The essence of the Writ of Habeas Corpus is to uphold the freedom and autonomy of individuals, ensuring that no person is detained against their will without lawful cause,” the Court said..Advocate Malkit Kaur represented the petitioner.Advocate Shiva Khurmi represented the State of Punjab. Public Prosecutor Manish Bansal and Advocate Shubam Mangla represented the Union Territory of Chandigarh..[Read Judgment]