‘Same Sex Marriage Not Legalised But Couples Can Very Well Form A Family': Madras HC
हिंदी తెలుగు اردو
Home Politics Economy World Security Law Science Society Culture Editor's Pick Opinion
Support independent journalism. Donate Now
Law
'Same Sex Marriage Not Legalised But Couples Can Very Well Form A Family': Madras HC
The Wire Staff
8 minutes ago
The bench also slammed the police for failing to respond to the urgent messages sent by the petitioner and forcing the woman to go with her parents.
Photo: Yoga Balaji/Wikimedia Commons. CC BY 3.0.
Real journalism holds power accountable
Since 2015, The Wire has done just that.
But we can continue only with your support.
Contribute now
New Delhi: While granting relief to a woman who wanted to go with her female partner, the Madras high court has ruled that the fact that 'marriage is not the sole mode to found a family' is well-settled in LGBTQIA+ jurisprudence.
The division bench of Justices G.R. Swaminathan and V. Lakshminarayanan were hearing the habeas corpus petition of the woman partner of the 25-year-old woman who was detained by her family against her will.
'We have come to the conclusion that the detenue is entitled to go with the petitioner (female partner) and that she cannot be detained against her will by her family members,' said the bench, reported New Indian Express.
The court also restrained the family members of the woman from 'interfering with her personal liberty'. The court also also issued a 'writ of continuing mandamus' to the jurisdictional police for providing sufficient protection to the woman and her partner as and when required.
'Marriage is not the sole mode to found a family. The concept of a 'chosen family' is now well-settled and acknowledged in LGBTQIA+ jurisprudence,' said the court.
The court said the Supreme Court's order in the Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty Vs Union of India case may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples but they can very well form a family.
Court slams police for forcing the woman to go with her parents
The bench noted that the petitioner has not mentioned anywhere about the true nature of their relationship but called herself a close friend. The court said that it understood the hesitation on her part since the society is still conservative.
The bench also slammed the police in Gudiyatham in Vellore district, Reddiyarpalayam in Puducherry and Jeevan Beema Nagar in Karnataka for failing to respond to the urgent messages sent by the petitioner and forcing the woman to go with her parents.
The bench also rejected the statement made by the woman's mother that the petitioner had led her daughter 'astray' and turned her into a 'drug addict.'
The court said that it had endeavoured in vain to impress upon the mother that her daughter is entitled to choose a life of her own since she is an adult as the law is clear and the precedents are clearer on the issue.
The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
Make a contribution to Independent Journalism
Related News
'Not the Statements to be Made': Karnataka HC Tells BJP MLC to Apologise to DC Over Pakistan Remarks
Free Speech on Eggshells: What the Ali Khan Mahmudabad Case Signals for All of Us
The Gujarat Evictions and the Weaponisation of National Security
The Arrest and Trial of Professor Azaan M
When the Supreme Court Echoes Populist Sentiments, It Risks Undermining the Constitution's Voice
For Mahmudabad's Bail Observations, We Cannot Blame Just the Supreme Court
Bombay HC Slams State, College For Rustication, Arrest of Student Over Post on Operation Sindoor
SC Extends Stay on BJP Minister Vijay Shah's Arrest; Closes Madhya Pradesh HC Proceedings
'In Public Interest': MMRDA Tells SC as it Scraps Tender for Mumbai Elevated Road, Tunnel Projects
View in Desktop Mode
About Us
Contact Us
Support Us
© Copyright. All Rights Reserved.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Wire
13 hours ago
- The Wire
‘Beaten With Leather Whip': Members of Student Groups Allege Harrowing Torture in Detention by Delhi Police Special Cell
Law Atul Howale The detained students and activists told The Wire that they were forcibly detained by police officials, who were in civil clothing, without following any legal procedure. New Delhi: Members of the Delhi-based student organisation Bhagat Singh Chhatra Ekta Manch (BSCEM) and the Forum Against Corporatisation and Militarisation (FACAM) have alleged that at least six individuals associated with them, and one person working with Nazariya Magazine, were detained and assaulted by the Delhi Police's Special Cell without due process. The individuals, aged between 19 and 26 years of age, have claimed they were subjected to extreme physical and mental torture between July 9 and July 21, under the guise of 'interrogation' by the special cell over the whereabouts of an IAS officer's daughter. Timeline of detentions The police allegedly detained Gurkirat (20), Gaurav (23) and Gaurang (24), who are associated with the BSCEM, on July 9 around 3:30 PM from Ber Sarai in Delhi. They told The Wire that they were forcibly detained by police officials in civil clothing, without following any legal procedure. The Delhi Police's Special Cell had detained these students and activists from various locations in the capital. Two days later, on July 11, Ethemam (26) and Lakshita (Badal) (21) of the FACAM were detained in Delhi around 1:00 PM. Samrat, a professor and social activist, was detained the next day, on July 12, from his home in Haryana. On July 19, Rudra, who is associated with Nazariya Magazine, was detained at the New Delhi railway station. Speaking to The Wire about the detention, BSCEM member Gurkirat said, 'On July 9, Gaurav, Gaurang and I were in Ber Sarai, Delhi, collecting some books from Rudra's house. Around 3:30 PM, three to four men in civil clothing , who were police officers, came and questioned us. 'They said, 'You are terrorists, not students. You have to come with us to the office.' We countered and asked them to show a warrant and demanded their police ID cards. After this, one of the officers showed his ID card and said, 'Now you must come.'' When they resisted, one of the officers slapped both Gaurav and Gaurang five to six times, Gurkirat claimed. 'One of the policemen pushed me and threatened me, too. He said, 'I don't care that you're a girl.' After that, they called a woman constable and forced me into a police vehicle.' Similarly, describing her detention, Lakshita, a member of the FACAM, said, "I reached Delhi from Ahmedabad around 11 AM on July 11. At 1 PM, some policemen came to my house and forcibly put me and my friend, Ehtemam, into a vehicle. They confiscated our phones, laptops, and iPads, and as soon as we were in the car, they put all the devices on airplane mode. They did not give us any information about where we were being taken." She added, 'An FIR (First Information Report) has been filed against us, we have not been provided with a copy. When I received a notice (police served her an online notice, she mentioned) for interrogation, it mentioned an FIR number, but I was unaware of the specific allegations mentioned in the FIR against me.' 'Not taken to police station' According to the detained activists, they were not taken to any official police station by the Delhi Police. Instead, the students who spoke to The Wire claimed they were held at an unknown location in Delhi's New Friends Colony. All seven individuals, who were picked up from different locations on different days, were kept at this place. Gurkirat and Lakshita claimed that the location was 'not a common police station' but a large 'bungalow', which they were told was an office of the Delhi Police's Special Cell. Interrogation, physical torture, threats and harassment Students and activists have alleged that the police interrogation after their detention was a process of harassment and physical and mental torture of them. To intimidate Gurkirat, Gaurav and Gaurang were stripped naked in front of her and brutally beaten on the soles of their feet with a leather whip, the activists alleged. Gurkirat said, "They took us to a room where we could see what was happening in the next room through a glass. There, the police officer called my friends Gaurav and Gaurang, stripped them, and made them lie down on a cold steel table. Then, using a leather belt with a wooden handle, the officers repeatedly whipped them on the soles of their feet. They would beat them and ask them to stand up, and when they couldn't, they would beat them again.' 'This wasn't for any interrogation process; it was done just to show me a 'demo' of what could happen to me. After that, they took me to the same room and beat me in the same way,' she said. While Gurkirat was not stripped completely, the policewomen , also in civil clothing, tortured her and beat her on the foot with the leather whip. She also alleged that prior to that, the policemen slapped her and pulled her by the hair. The students and activists, while speaking to The Wire, claimed that in the end, they were forced to sign 'several blank sheets of the paper and false confessions' without even being allowed to read them. Gaurav, a student at the Delhi School of Journalism, who has now returned to his native, Nawada in Bihar, spoke to The Wire about his eight-day-long ordeal. He said, 'Gurkirat, Gaurang and I were picked up from Ber Sarai on July 9. In the first three days, the police tortured us a lot. They would wake us up at 1:30 or 2:00 am and take us to the interrogation room. There, they would strip us completely naked, make us lie on the floor, and beat us with belts and sticks.' 'On the day of release on July 17, they asked us to sign several documents. Some of them were blank papers. We were being threatened that if we did not sign, they would not release us," he added. When asked what the police asked them during the interrogation, four of them (Lakshita, Gaurav, Gurkirat and Ehtamam) said that the initial and most persistent question was about IAS officer Archana Verma's daughter Valika. The police were constantly asking, 'Where is Valika?'.They kept asking questions like, 'Why did she leave home?', and whether anyone had helped her 'escape'. Lakshita and Gurkirat claimed that of the seven detainees, Ehtemam faced the most severe and inhuman torture. Throughout the entire detention, Ehtemam, a lawyer-activist with FACAM who studied at Jamia Millia Islamia, was deliberately and more brutally targeted because of his 'Muslim identity', they alleged. He was constantly beaten while being subjected to Islamophobic slurs like " Mulla" and " Katwa", they said. Lakshita claimed that the police also tried to falsely cast her and Ehtemam's relationship in a "love jihad" angle – a conspiracy theory used by the right-wing groups that falsely accuses Muslim men of duping Hindu (non-Muslim) women with promises of love and marriage to religiously convert them. What's the IAS officer and her daughter's connection with the detentions? Lakshita and Gurkirat claimed that primary reason they were subjected to sustained torture is a 'personal dispute' between a senior bureaucrat IAS officer Archana Verma and her daughter, Valika Verma. According to some of the detainees, Valika, a 24-year-old law graduate from Jindal University, Haryana, and the editorial member of the Nazariya Magazine, had left her home due to the ideological differences with her mother and was living independently in Delhi's Ber Sarai. Gurkirat said, "We do not know where Valika is. She had ideological differences with her mother and left the house. But the police have been after us and have brutally tortured us. During our questioning, they repeatedly asked us where Valika was.' Lakshita also said that they have still not been provided with a copy of the FIR, whose number was mentioned on the notice she received. She is unaware of the specific allegations mentioned against them. She said, "An FIR has been filed. I too received an online notice, I have that notice, the one summoning me for an investigation under that FIR. But the police are not giving us the FIR, they are not giving us anything. The police were constantly telling us, 'If you come to Delhi, we will arrest you.'' She added that the notice that she received from the police was sent online to her parents' mobile on July 20. Parents summoned Throughout this entire issue, the parents of the detained students have also faced harassment. Both Lakshita and Gurkirat stated that their parents were summoned to Delhi and were forced to sign documents so that their children were released. Lakshita said, "They made our parents write, and sign it, that if they send us back to Delhi, then police will arrest us. Due to this fear, my parents are not allowing me to speak with anyone and are pressuring me to remain at home.' The parents of the other students also took their children back home and kept them away from any form of legal or public response. Ehtemam is currently living in Lucknow with his family after the harrowing detention. Speaking to The Wire, he said: "The police physically and mentally harassed me. They kept asking me during the interrogation where Valika was, which I did not know. They called me 'Mulla' and said they would create a 'love jihad' angle with my friend Lakshita. They threatened to plant weapons at my house and said they will arrest my parents for arms trafficking.' He claimed that when the police released him, they did not return his belongings. He added, "The police took my phone, my wallet, my Bar Association ID card, my Aadhaar card, my PAN card and most importantly, they did not return my flat keys, which they had initially taken from me.' Amongst the seven detainees, Rudra was the youngest, and only 19 years old. A student at Delhi University's Zakir Husain College, he was working with Valika for the Nazariya Magazine. Rudra was the last person to be detained by the police, on July 19, at the New Delhi railway station, and was taken after some of the initially detained individuals had already been released. From the time the student activists were detained on July 9 until July 18, Nazariya Magazine has been posting calls for their release on their social media handles on Facebook, X, Instagram, as well as on its website. However, the last post on their Facebook page was on July 18. Following Rudra's detention on July 19, there have been no further posts on any of the platforms. The detained students were released in stages between July 16 and July 21. After eight days of detention, Gurkirat was the first to be released on the night of July 16. Only after her release did the outside world receive concrete information about the case and the detention of the other students. The following day, on July 17, Lakshita, Gaurav and Gaurang were released. Ehtemam, who had faced the most severe physical and mental torture, was released on July 18. Samrat, who was arrested in Haryana, was released on July 19. Finally, Rudra, who had been detained last, was released on July 21. This is not the first time that the students of the BSCEM had been detained. In May last year, during the Lok Sabha elections, BSCEM had made wall paintings in Delhi, calling for an election boycott. Two female students of the organisation, Lakshita and Uttara, were detained by the police while leaving their college after an exam. A few months ago, the students associated with BSCEM alleged that after a wall painting in JNU depicting atrocities in Bastar, four members – Gaurav, Gaurang, Kiran and Rahul – were illegally detained for 15 hours at the Vasant Vihar police station, Delhi, where they were also allegedly beaten. The Wire reached out to Delhi Police for a comment, but was not able to connect over telephone. We sent the email to the pro@ Delhi Police. This story will be updated if a response is received. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
The Hindu
4 days ago
- The Hindu
Issue of advocate casting allegation against Justice Swaminathan goes to CJ
A Division Bench headed by Justice G.R. Swaminathan of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Monday directed the High Court Registry to place before the Chief Justice the papers regarding advocate S. Vanchinathan accusing Justice Swaminathan of exhibiting caste bias. A Division Bench of Justices G.R. Swaminathan and K. Rajasekar had said Mr. Vanchinathan had been giving interviews to YouTube Channels accusing the judge of caste bias. On July 24, when he appeared before the court, he declined to answer to the question if he stood by his imputation, and instead sought a written questionnaire. A pre-cognisance notice was issued to him and he was directed to appear on July 28. The court said during the intervening weekend, a press conference was held and a statement was published on behalf of a few retired judges questioning the process adopted by the bench. 'We have to record our dismay as to how such interference with the judicial process can be made. Several assumptions which have no factual basis have been made. We characterise their approach as most unfortunate,' the judges said. Contending the proceedings had nothing to do with Mr. Vanchinathan's earlier complaint to the Chief Justice of India against the judge, the court said it issued the notice only because of the 'persistent campaign being conducted by Mr. Vanchinathan' in social media. 'We had not, till this moment, initiated any contempt action against Vanchinathan. That Vanchinathan has been slandering Justice Swaminathan is beyond dispute,' the court said. A video recording of one of the interviews of Vanchinathan was played in the court where such allegations were made. 'This interview is only a sample. There are scores of such YouTube videos.' The bench said it wanted to comply with the principles of natural justice before making a reference to the Chief Justice. 'Our intention was to close the matter if Vanchinathan indicated change of heart. He does not have any such intention. But he had been cleverly advised. He, therefore, declined to take any stand before us. His written reply is completely silent on the query raised in the notice,' the judges said. 'We judges have taken oath to discharge our judicial duties not only without favour but also without fear. When a judge disposes of a matter, the lawyer before him neither wins nor loses. It is the case that is won or lost. Lawyers and Judges belong to one large family. They are members of the legal community. When a Judge sits on the dais, he discharges his judicial duties as per his conscience and by strictly adhering to the judicial oath. He cannot be seen as carrying on his caste or religious labels while on the bench,' they added. 'If someone continues to have such a perception, he obviously has jaundiced eyes. The legal system provides for remedies and recourse has to be taken to them by persons aggrieved by individual decisions. Without doing so, launching communal campaigns on social media would eventually weaken the system itself. Time has come to regulate the level of discourse in social media. In the name of freedom of speech and expression, one cannot condone acts of contempt,' the bench said. The court felt the channels which rake in money by such slanderous campaigns would have to be taken head on. 'Lawyers who make such statements are guilty of professional misconduct. There is something called Laxman rekha which if crossed must invite peril,' the court observed. The judges said Mr. Vanchinathan had mobilised a group of lawyers and retired Judges to rush to his rescue. 'They have also passed reckless comments without waiting for today's outcome. Gratuitous appeals and advice have poured forth. We ignore them with the contempt which they deserve,' the judges said, adding, 'it is one thing to criticise judgments but entirely another to cast aspersions on judges.' Mr. Vanchinathan, in his reply, submitted that it was the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court who could take a call in the matter. 'We also have no doubt on this score,' the judges said, and directed the Registry to place the papers before the CJ for appropriate action.
The Wire
5 days ago
- The Wire
J&K: Army Official Allegedly Beats Up Nomadic Tribals Accused of Aiding Militants
Srinagar: The army allegedly beat up a group of nomadic tribals on Saturday (July 26) in the higher reaches of Jammu and Kashmir's capital Srinagar on charges of shielding suspected militants, The Wire has learnt. At least four victims, identified as Mohammad Liyakat, Mohammad Azam, Showkat Ahmad and Abdul Qadir, all residents of Rajouri district, suffered injuries of various degrees in the thrashing, which was allegedly led by an army official of the 50 Rashtriya Rifles. The official is in charge of a new base camp that has come up in the Dhagwan area in the higher reaches of Srinagar in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terrorist attack. Terming the incident a 'grave violation of human rights', ruling National Conference lawmaker from Rajouri's Budhal constituency and tribal leader Javed Choudhary, who is in contact with the victims, demanded action against the guilty. 'The administration should immediately register an FIR and rein in the forces responsible for these recurring atrocities against innocent tribal people. This pattern of intimidation and violence against tribal communities must stop,' Choudhary told The Wire, adding that the community will launch a mass agitation if the perpetrators are not punished. The Wire could not immediately verify the name of the army official who, according to the description provided by the victims, sported long hair and used a heavy wooden cane to beat up the tribal people. The army's Srinagar-based spokesperson Lieutenant Colonel M.K. Sahu could not be reached for comment. Srinagar's senior superintendent of police G.V. Sundeep Chakravarthy said that the police were trying to get in touch with the alleged victims, who are reportedly on the way to the capital city. 'It is a very far-off area. Once our team gets in touch with them, we will have clarity on the matter,' he said. Dhagwan is a high-altitude geographical barrier where Srinagar's Zabarwan range of mountains and the Lidder valley of Anantnag district meet. It has dense vegetation comprising pine and cedar forests, glacial water streams, deep ravines and steep mountains spread over thousands of hectares of land. The area serves as a summer home for nearly 200 families of the nomadic Gujjar and Bakkerwal communities, the poorest of the poor in Jammu and Kashmir, who graze their herds of sheep, goats and other livestock in the mountain pasturelands circling Kashmir during the summer and migrate to Jammu before the onset of winter. Three victims who spoke with The Wire over phone alleged that they were segregated into two groups, of which one group comprising 10-15 men were 'beaten up like animals', while others received minor thrashing. The victims claimed that two army soldiers held the victims by their arms while the superior official thrashed them 'without showing any mercy'. Recalling the ordeal, Liyakat said that a group of soldiers came to his seasonal home on Saturday morning, saying that 'sahab' was looking for him. He said that when he reached the camp at around 1 pm, around 40 other male residents had gathered outside it. The army official accused the tribal men of having information about militants and providing them food. He also issued an ultimatum to the residents to vacate their homes within two days. Speaking with The Wire over phone, Liyakat said that the officer accused him of sheltering militants who have turned the higher reaches of Kashmir into a dangerous battleground by inflicting heavy casualties on security forces in the years after the reading down of Article 370. Security agencies have been carrying out massive searches in the girdle of mountains surrounding Kashmir amid fears of infiltration by militants after the four-day-long Indo-Pakistani conflict in May this year. 'When I rejected his allegations, he said 'Go to Pakistan and get them [militants] from there'. Why will I go to Pakistan? He said 'our people have died in Pahalgam', but what have we got to do with it?' Liyakat said in a weak voice over the phone. Muhammad Yusuf, who received a minor beating, claimed that he pleaded with the army official to let go of Liyakat as he was going to be surgically operated on next week. He said that the officer didn't listen and thrashed him anyway. 'Now my second leg is also broken,' a distraught Liyakat said. 'I can't even stand up and go to the bathroom. They should have shot me there instead of putting me through this ordeal.' Dhagwan is also a haven for trekking enthusiasts and mountaineers as it connects Srinagar with the Dachigam national park, the Wasturwan meadow, the Overa wildlife sanctuary and Pahalgam. According to security agencies, the area has been used as a transit route by militants in recent years to move from south Kashmir into Srinagar. Following the terrorist attack in Pahalgam, the victims said that the army set up a new base camp in the area. 'We carried the wooden logs and other materials on our backs for the base camp. We do their work and serve them tea whenever they like. This is how we have been paid back,' said Yusuf. This is not the first incident where the army has faced accusations of using violence against the tribal people of Jammu and Kashmir, who have come under an intensifying political and security spotlight following the reading down of Article 370 in 2019. In December 2023, three members of the Gujjar community were allegedly tortured to death, while many others suffered grave injuries when the army launched an operation in the Poonch district of Jammu division, which has emerged as a militancy hotspot since 2019. The army had set up a court of inquiry with regard to the torture allegations. A brigadier and three other officers were removed from the command of the army camp where the tribal civilians were tortured. On November 20 last year, four civilians were detained for questioning in connection with a militant attack in the Kishtwar district of the Chenab valley in the Jammu region; they were allegedly tortured in custody. The army had ordered a probe into this matter also, but it wasn't immediately known whether any action was taken against the alleged culprits. Zafar Choudhary, a Jammu-based senior political analyst, said that the Gujjar community was having a 'strong feeling of either being specifically targeted or not being factored in as worthy of consideration as a human stock'. 'If the authorities think the exclusion of this community with a strong feeling of alienation and injustice was their political objective, then they have almost achieved it. If there is a case of rogue elements colluding with political interests at isolated smaller levels, then an all encompassing legal, administrative and political process must take place towards confidence-building, keeping in view overall strategic and security interests as specific to Jammu and Kashmir,' he said in a post on X.
