Promotees Allowed to Challenge Provisional Seniority List in Dispute Between Direct Recruitment and Promotion: Kerala High Court Frivolous Defenses Cannot Justify Leave to Defend Under Order XXXVII CPC Delhi High Court Candidates Merely Enrolled in Final Year B.V.Sc. Program Ineligible for Veterinary Officer Recruitment: Rajasthan High Court Manufacturing or Sale of Garments Does Not Attract Copyright Protection; Procedural Violations Under Trade Marks Act Renders Prosecution Unsustainable: P&H High Court Ownership Alone Is Not Sufficient to Maintain Eviction Suit; Plaintiff Must Qualify as a Lessor Under Lease Agreement: Calcutta High Court Findings Based on Evidence Cannot Be Interfered With in a Second Appeal Without Substantial Question of Law: AP High Court Chain of Circumstances Broken: Inferences Cannot Replace Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Kerala High Court Bail | Prolonged Incarceration Without Trial Violates Article 21 of the Constitution: Bombay High Court Encroachment on a Common Lane Gives Rise to Recurring Cause of Action: Madras High Court Holds Limitation Act Inapplicable to Pathway Disputes Reproductive Autonomy Includes the Right to Abort Without Spousal Consent: P&H High Court Access to Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226 is Not an Absolute Bar Against MSEFC Awards: Supreme Court Refers Key Questions on Writ Jurisdiction to Larger Bench Civil Court Jurisdiction Not Ousted for Title and Mortgage Disputes Under SARFAESI Act: Supreme Court Principle of Bail is the Rule, Jail is the Exception: Supreme Court Panchayat Law | Mandatory Compliance With Section 34 And Rule 3 Is Non-Negotiable In Resignation Cases: Bombay High Court Quashes Resignation Of Upa-Sarpanch Recovery of Bullet Fired from Accused’s Weapon Crucial: PH High Court Reaffirms Conviction in Murder Case Injured Witness Evidence Carries Built-in Reliability Unless Contradicted Significantly: Kerala High Court Partly Allows Appeal in Murder Case Civil Dispute with Criminal Elements Cannot Be Quashed Under Section 482 Cr.P.C.: Karnataka High Court Issuance of Summons Under Section 91 CrPC During Preliminary Verification is Without Jurisdiction: High Court of J&K and Ladakh Article 21 Prevails Over NDPS Act’s Section 37 Restrictions in Cases of Prolonged Incarceration: Delhi High Court Once a Property is Waqf, It Remains Waqf Perpetually: Calcutta High Court Affirms No Secular Ownership Can Derive from Waqf Properties Surveillance Without Opportunity to Object Violates Articles 14, 19, and 21: Allahabad High Court Quashes Class-B History Sheets Mandatory Provisions of Order XXI CPC Were Violated, Rendering the Auction Sale Illegal: Punjab and Haryana High Court

High Court Upholds Fundamental Right to Personal Liberty in Same-Sex Relationship Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Chandigarh, August 17, 2023* – In a groundbreaking judgement, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara, has upheld the fundamental right to personal liberty in the context of a same-sex relationship. The case centered around two young adult females who were in a live-in relationship for the past four years and sought protection through the State by invoking their rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Justice Chitkara, in his observations, stated, “Love, attraction, and fondness have no boundaries, and not even the boundary of gender.” He emphasized that Article 21 of the Constitution of India applies irrespective of the gender of individuals involved and that every person within the territory of India has an inherent and indefeasible fundamental right to life, which the State is duty-bound to protect.

The judgement drew upon the Constitutional bench ruling in Mohd Arif @ Ashfaq v. Registrar, Supreme Court of India (2014) 9 SCC 737, which highlighted the origins and significance of Article 21 as a precious fundamental right.

The Court issued a protection order, directing concerned authorities to provide two female police officials to ensure the safety of the petitioners for a span of two weeks, with provisions for extension based on threat analysis or the petitioners’ requests. The order clarified that it was not a blanket bail in any FIR and that it would not hinder any legitimate interrogation or investigation.

“This ruling not only upholds the rights of individuals in same-sex relationships but also underscores the importance of personal liberty as a cornerstone of our democracy,” remarked legal experts. The judgement is being lauded as a significant step forward in recognizing and safeguarding the rights of individuals regardless of their sexual orientation.

The order, while acknowledging the evolving ethos and lifestyles of the younger generations, enforces the State’s responsibility to protect fundamental rights. The judgement has garnered attention for its progressive approach and commitment to ensuring equal protection under the law.

As per the court’s order, the protection granted will eclipse after thirty days, and individuals involved can download a true copy of the judgement from the official web page of the court. Legal scholars expect this judgement to serve as a benchmark in similar cases and contribute to the evolving jurisprudence around personal liberties in India.

Date of Decision: 17.08.2023                      

Pooja and another vs State of  Punjab and others    

Similar News