A major individual has the fundamental right to personal liberty and the autonomy to choose their companion and place of residence, which cannot be overridden by parental or family detention.

Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

In this habeas corpus petition, the petitioner seeks corpus of Ms. Anshika Sharma.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that she and the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma are old acquaintance; they are in romantic relationship; the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma wanted to marry the petitioner, but her father, who is the respondent no.4, and other family members are not agreeable to it and they have denied for it. It is the case of the petitioner that the date of birth of the petitioner is 06.05.2005, and that of the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma is 13.06.2007; they both are major. The petitioner has attached documents with regard to their date of birth.

3. It is further the case of the petitioner that the family members of the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma are pressurising her for marriage with some other person, and they had warned the corpus not to retain any relationship with the petitioner.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. On 25.05.2026, this Court had directed the corpus to appear before the Court. Today, the corpus has been produced before us by SI Satish Singh, and Lady Police Constable Nikita from Police Station Vasant Vihar.

6. The Court interacted with the corpus. She has revealed that she is 18 years of age; she is a student and pursuing her graduation in Commerce; she is the daughter of Rakesh Sharma, and is staying with her father at 11/12 Vijay Park, Dehradun. According to her, she has been forcibly detained by her father in her father’s house; she wants to go with the petitioner, who is the son of Aklu Sahani. According to her, her father and uncle used to abuse her whenever they drink.

7. At it, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 submits that the statement of the corpus is quite contradictory to what she has stated under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; in fact, the corpus has taken money and jewellery from her home. Interrupting to it, the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma speaks that there are multiple cases against her. At one moment, she wanted to commit suicide. She denies the allegations of taking cash and jewellery.

8. According to the petitioner, he and the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma are in romantic relationship; the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma is major; she is pursuing her graduation; the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma has a right to go wherever she wants to go. Therefore, the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma is free to go wherever she wants to go. The corpus has expressed to stay with the petitioner Rohan Kumar. The corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma is free to do so. The habeas corpus petition may be decided accordingly.

9. The habeas corpus petition, as such, stands disposed of, accordingly.

10. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not present today.

11. Learned State Counsel has suggested that today the corpus has been brought before the Court by police from Police Station Vasant Vihar, District Dehradun. They may be directed to take care of the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma, and escort her at a place where she wants to go in Dehradun.

12. The Police Officers, who have escorted the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma, shall ensure safe journey of the corpus Anshika Sharma till she reaches the petitioner Rohan Kumar. The Court also requests the Senior Superintendant of Police, Dehradun, to assess the threat perception of the petitioner as well as the corpus Ms. Anshika Sharma, and if required, adequate protection may be provided to