The Jodhpur bench of the Rajasthan High Court recently dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed by a man seeking the release of his live-in partner, who was legally married to another man and was also found to be his real sister. The court firmly ruled that no legal right exists under the Constitution of India to be in such a relationship, particularly in these circumstances.
The division bench, comprising Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Madan Gopal Vyas, emphasized that the Indian Constitution does not support relationships that contradict societal morality and legal principles. The court also imposed a fine of Rs. 10,000 on the petitioner.
"The Constitution of India does not sanctify an immoral act. A writ court cannot exercise its extraordinary discretionary powers in a matter that would only promote immorality in society," the court stated.
Read Also:- Rajasthan High Court Quashes Adverse Remarks Against Circle Officer, Cites Violation of Natural Justice
The court reiterated that habeas corpus petitions serve as a critical legal remedy to prevent illegal detention. However, such a plea cannot be entertained when it seeks to validate a relationship that is legally and morally unacceptable.
The court elaborated on the concept of locus standi, which refers to the legal right of an individual to bring forth a lawsuit. It stated that while habeas corpus petitions have a relaxed standard regarding locus standi, a person claiming to be in a live-in relationship with his own married sister does not have legal standing to file such a petition.
"There is no fundamental right of a person to have a live-in relationship with a woman legally married to another man, and more particularly, when the woman appears to be his own sister," the bench held.
The court deemed the alleged live-in relationship as "void ab initio", meaning it holds no legal validity from the outset. It cited Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act, which states that agreements against public policy or involving immoral considerations are unenforceable in law.
"The alleged live-in relationship between the petitioner and the married woman has no legal sanctity and must be held void ab initio," the judgment stated.
The petitioner relied on the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) to argue that constitutional morality should override societal morality. However, the Rajasthan High Court rejected this argument, stating that the observations in Navtej Johar were made in a different context and did not apply to the present case.
"May be the offence of adultery is not attracted against a woman, but the very purpose of conferring high prerogative writs to the High Courts would be lost if this Court entertains this habeas corpus petition on the plea that the petitioner, by living in an adulterous relationship with a married woman, did not commit a crime."
Case Background & Court's Decision
The petitioner had filed the habeas corpus plea alleging that the woman was subjected to physical and mental cruelty by her in-laws. However, upon investigation, it was revealed that the petitioner was the woman’s real brother and was in a live-in relationship with her.
Read Also:- Child Care Leave is Similar to Privilege Leave, Not an Absolute Right: Rajasthan High Court
The petitioner cited previous legal precedents, including Leela & Anr. v State of Rajasthan & Ors. and Devu G Nair v State of Kerala & Ors., to argue that societal morality should not interfere with individual relationships. However, the court rejected these references, stating that both cases involved different facts and circumstances.
"The present case is not merely about a simple live-in relationship between two consenting adults but about such a relationship between real brother and sister, which is beyond legal and societal acceptance," the court observed.
Considering the gravity of the case, the Rajasthan High Court dismissed the habeas corpus petition and imposed a fine of Rs. 10,000, directing that the amount be deposited with the Government Blind School, Jodhpur within four weeks. The court also warned that failure to comply with this order would result in suo motu contempt proceedings against the petitioner.
"Having regard to the facts so stated in this writ petition, the present D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 467/2024 is dismissed with a cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be deposited with the Government Blind School, Jodhpur, within a period of four weeks, failing which the Office shall register a suo motu contempt case against the petitioner," the court concluded.
Case Title: GR v. State of Rajasthan
