HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
A.Y. KOGJE, SAMIR J. DAVE, JJ
LALABHAI MEVABHAI RABARI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (HABEAS CORPUS) NO. 3715 of 2025
(A) Constitution of India - Article 21 - Writ of Habeas Corpus - The petitioner sought the production of the corpus-girl, asserting legal marriage and unlawful detention by her parents. The corpus, a 21-year-old educated individual, expressed her desire to return to the petitioner. The court recognized her capacity to make independent decisions and ordered her release into the petitioner's custody. (Paras 2-7)
(B) Legal Capacity - The court emphasized the importance of individual autonomy, particularly for adults capable of making informed choices. The corpus's declaration of intent was pivotal in the court's decision to allow her to live with the petitioner. (Paras 5-6)
(C) Law and Order Concerns - The court acknowledged potential law and order issues regarding the petitioner’s safe passage with the corpus and directed police assistance. (Paras 9)
Findings of Court:
The court found the corpus capable of deciding her living arrangements and ordered her release to the petitioner.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the legality of the corpus's detention and her expressed wishes regarding her marital relationship.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that an adult's autonomy must be respected, and her expressed desire to return to her husband was determinative.
Result: Petition allowed.
ORDER :
(A.Y. KOGJE, J.)
1. Present petition is filed for following reliefs;
A. Your Lordships may be pleased to admit and allow this petition.
B. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of habeas corpus and/or any other writ, order or direction directing the concerned respondents to produce the corpus-girl viz. Kinjalben before this Hon’ble Court, and thereafter, further be pleased to pass appropriate and further orders handing over the custody of the corpus-girl viz. Kinjalben to the petitioner.
C. Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the concerned respondent to produce the corpus-girl viz. Kinjalben.
D. Your Lordships may be pleased to pass such other order as may be deemed just and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. The petitioner who is the husband of the corpus- respondent no.13 has filed the present petition as though petitioner and corpus are legally married and the certificate is also placed on record at Annexure-A and residing together as husband and wife and under the guise of ill health of the parents, the corpus was taken by her parents under the promise of returning her for 2 days but, thereafter, she was not permitted to join the petitioner.
3. On the basis of the advance copy served upon the office of the Public Prosecutor, the corpus is brought before the court through the respondent no.3. Learned advocate Mr.N. R. Desai has institutions to appear on behalf of the respondent no.5- father of the corpus.
4. At the request of both the parties, the matter is taken up in the chamber to ascertain the wishes of the corpus. The corpus is a well educated individual, studied in 3rd Year of B.A. with History subject and she is 21 years. The interview with the corpus in presence of the respective advocates would indicate that she is well conversant and aware of her own rights, she is well dispensed and also capable of taking her own decision.
5. The corpus has declared before the court that under the guard of ill health of parents, she taken from her matrimonial place with a promise to return her after 2 days but thereafter, she was not permitted to go back to the petitioner and she is apprehensive as the parents and other family members are emotionally trying to influence her.
6. She has declared before the court she is interested and inclined to go with the petitioner as she has accepted to be his legally wedded husband and both of them belong to the same community still for no reasons, the parents and other family members are objecting such relations.
7. The corpus having made a declaration before the court that she is inclined to go with the petitioner, being his legally wedded wife and the court having found the corpus capable of taking of her individual decision being major and well educated, the petition is required to be allowed to the aforesaid extent. The corpus is permitted to go along with the petitioner.
8. The petitioner to file an affidavit on or before 21st March 2025 before this court to the extent that he shall take due and proper care of the corpus as his legally wedded wife not giving any occasion of any complain or harassment.
9. At this stage, learned advocate for the petitioner has raised an apprehension of law and order as many people are presumed to have gathered within the court premises to prevent the petitioner from taking the corpus along with him, therefore, learned APP may make necessary arrangement through the attending police officer, Aagthala Police Station to provide for safe passage of the petitioner and corpus to their destination.
Rule is made absolute.
An adult's expressed desire to return to her spouse must be respected, affirming individual autonomy under Article 21.
The court affirmed the right of a major individual to choose their partner and emphasized the importance of personal liberty and safety in such decisions.
A major individual has the autonomy to choose their residence and cannot be compelled against their will, affirming the principles of individual rights and legal capacity.
The court affirmed the right of an individual to make independent decisions regarding marriage, emphasizing the importance of personal autonomy.
The court upheld the corpus's right to personal liberty and choice in relationships, recognizing her maturity and education as factors in permitting her to live with her husband.
The court recognized the independent decision-making capacity of the corpus, allowing her to live with the petitioner based on her expressed wishes.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of an individual, especially of the corpus's age, to make decisions regarding marriage and the emphasis on personal liberty and ....
The court affirmed the autonomy of the corpus in her marital decision post attaining majority.
The court upheld the autonomy of an adult individual in choosing their living arrangements, emphasizing that no illegal confinement was present.
The best interests of the child and the willingness and intention of the child in custody disputes are crucial factors for the court to consider.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.