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.

ORDER :

A.Y. KOGJE, J.

1. This petition is filed by the petitioner for following reliefs:

“(b) Your Lordships may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of habeas corpus and/or any other writ, order or direction, directing the respondent no.2 & 3 to produce the wife of the petitioner (Corpus) before this Honorable Court and thereafter considering her wish and will, the custody of the corpus be handed over to the petitioner in the interest of justice.

(c) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, Your Lordship may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no.2 & 3 to produce corpus before this Honorable Court in the interest of justice.”

2. The Court had issued notice on 07.03.2025, pursuant to which the corpus is brought before the Court through respondent No.4 with whom the corpus was residing.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Kumar H. Trivedi has instructions to appear on behalf of respondent No.4. At joint request of the respective advocates, the matter is taken up foe hearing in Chamber to ascertain the wish of the corpus-Mittalben, who is major and her date of birth is 09.02.2004. She has done her education till BCA and the initial interaction with the corpus would indicate that she is capable of taking her own independent decision.

4. She is confirmed that the corpus and the petitioner had an affair since couple of years and thereafter, both had entered into marriage and get the marriage registered with the India Colony Ward, Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and such certificate is placed on record at Annexure-B. She has also indicated that as the petitioner and family of the corpus are residing in the same village, there is opposition by the uncles and other family members, who are residing at their native in Mansa, whereas the father of the corpus and his family have been residing in Ahmedabad since long. She has also raised an apprehension that if the relation with the petitioner is continued, then entire family of respondent No.4 would be ostracized (kept out of the community), otherwise she has clearly expressed her desire to go alongwith petitioner whom she considers to be her legally wedded husband.

5. She has also raised an apprehension that if she is sent alongwith her husband, there would be consequences which would affect their safety and security.

6. The Court having considered the aforesaid declaration made by the corpus in presence of respective advocates and the Court having found the corpus to be major and well aware of her own rights and well being, she is at free will to go alongwith the person of her choice, in present case, she has declared that she would like to go alongwith her husband-the petitioner.

7. Hence, the corpus-Patel Mittal Ghanshyambhai, aged 21 years is permitted to go alongwith the petitioner. In view of the apprehension expressed by her with regard to safety of her life, it is directed that the learned Additional Public Prosecutor to make necessary arrangement for safe passage of the corpus and the petitioner to their destination. In case of any untoward incident, the petitioner and the corpus are permitted to bring to the notice of the nearest police station, who shall take immediate action to protect the life and liberty of the petitioner and the corpus.

8. With the aforesaid, the petition stands allowed to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.