The court affirmed the individual's right to autonomy in personal relationships, particularly for LGBTQIA+ individuals, recognizing such choices as integral to personal liberty under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution.

ORDER :

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

The writ petitioner has filed this petition to cause production of Ms.D, the daughter of the fourth respondent herein. According to her, the fourth respondent, who is the father of the detenue, is detaining her against her will. The petitioner wants this Court to set the detenue at liberty.

2.The detenue was produced before us by the third respondent. The detenue was accompanied by her mother. We had a detailed interaction with both of them. The detenue's mother broke down and requested us to allow her to take her daughter back home. According to her, the writ petitioner had led her daughter astray. She even alleged that her daughter is drug-addicted and she squarely blamed the petitioner for her condition. The stand of the mother is that her daughter requires counselling and rehabilitation.

3.Before interacting with the detenue, we were conscious that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Devu G Nair versus The State of Kerala (2024 LiveLaw (SC) 249) had issued a set of guidelines for the courts in dealing with habeas corpus petitions or petitions for police protection. They read as follows:

“a. Habeas corpus petitions and petitions for protection filed by a partner, friend or a natal family member must be given a priority in listing and hearing before the court. A court must avoid adjourning the matter, or delays in the disposal of the case;

b. In evaluating the locus standi of a partner or friend, the court must not make a roving enquiry into the precise nature of the relationship between the appellant and the person;

c. The effort must be to create an environment conducive for a free and uncoerced dialogue to ascertain the wishes of the corpus; d. The court must ensure that the corpus is produced before the court and given the opportunity to interact with the judges in-person in chambers to ensure the privacy and safety of the detained or missing person. The court must conduct in- camera proceedings. The recording of the statement must be transcribed and the recording must be secured to ensure that it is not accessible to any other party;

e. The court must ensure that the wishes of the detained person is not unduly influenced by the Court, or the police, or the natal family during the course of the proceedings. In particular, the court must ensure that the individuals(s) alleged to be detaining the individual against their volition are not present in the same environment as the detained or missing person. Similarly, in petitions seeking police protection from the natal family of the parties, the family must not be placed in the same environment as the petitioners; f. Upon securing the environment and inviting the detained or missing person in chambers, the court must make active efforts to put the detained or missing person at ease. The preferred name and pronouns of the detained or missing person may be asked. The person must be given a comfortable seating, access to drinking water and washroom. They must be allowed to take periodic breaks to collect themselves. The judge must adopt a friendly and compassionate demeanor and make all efforts to defuse any tension or discomfort. Courts must ensure that the detained or missing person faces no obstacles in being able to express their wishes to the court;

g. A court while dealing with the detained or missing person may ascertain the age of the detained or missing person. However, the minority of the detained or missing person must not be used, at the thr