The Allahabad High Court has held that two adult women in a same-sex live-in relationship have a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution to live together peacefully. The Court directed the authorities to ensure their protection if their peaceful life is obstructed.
Justice Dr. Gautam Chowdhary passed the order on September 14, 2026, in Writ-C No. 36224 of 2026. The petition was filed by two adult women in a same-sex live-in relationship, who sought protection from alleged interference with their peaceful life.
Background
The petitioners’ counsel submitted that both women were adults, unmarried, in an interfaith and same-sex live-in relationship. It was alleged that family members and private respondents were interfering with their peaceful life and that the petitioners were facing threats and harassment.
Following an earlier direction, both petitioners appeared personally before the High Court. They told the Court that they had voluntarily decided to live together and wanted to continue their relationship without interference. The Court recorded that both were adults and capable of understanding what was in their own interest, and that their decision was based on free consent.
Court’s Observation
The High Court considered the Supreme Court’s decisions in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India and Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty v. Union of India. It noted that queer and LGBTQ+ couples have the right to form relationships under Article 21, flowing from privacy, choice and personal autonomy. At the same time, the Court noted that granting legal status to such relationships, including marriage, falls within the legislative domain.
The High Court held that when two adult citizens choose to live together voluntarily, their peaceful cohabitation in a live-in relationship is protected under Article 21. It further observed that family members, relatives or any section of society have no legal right to obstruct their peaceful cohabitation, threaten them or interfere with their physical liberty.
The Court also made it clear that the absence of marital recognition does not permit any third party or administrative authority to interfere with the dignity and physical security of adult citizens.
Decision
The Court held that the petitioners were protected under Article 21. It found that both were adults, educated and capable of understanding their own welfare, and had chosen to live together after careful consideration and without any force.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the writ petition. It directed that the petitioners be permitted to live together peacefully and that their family members or any other person should not interfere with their live-in relationship.
The Court further directed that if any obstruction arose, the petitioners could approach the concerned Police Commissioner, SSP or SP with a certified copy of the order. After verifying that they were adults and voluntarily living together, the police authorities were directed to provide immediate protection.
Case Title: Km Farida Ansari And Another v. State Of U.P. And 5 Others
