Courts accept that family goes beyond marital bonds. It's high time society did so too
When the Supreme Court of India decriminalised consensual same-sex relations in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India in 2018, it did more than just strike down an archaic colonial law. It recognised that queer individuals are entitled to equality, dignity and autonomy under the Constitution. During the proceedings, one of the counsels had emphatically argued, 'How strongly must we love knowing we are unconvicted felons under Section 377?' This unfettered practice of love, in the face of historical discrimination, was highlighted as a key argument for repealing Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. Going beyond the decriminalisation of same-sex relationships, the judgment said: 'The right to love and to find a partner, to find fulfilment in a same-sex relationship is essential to a society which believes in freedom under the constitutional order based on rights.'
Since Navtej, India's courts have seen a growing number of habeas corpus petitions involving queer individuals seeking protection from harassment, violence, or unlawful confinement by their natal families. The first such case was decided in 2018 in Sreeja S v. The Commissioner of Police, Thiruvananthapuram, where the Kerala High Court upheld the right of a lesbian woman to live with her partner without fear of reprisals from her family. While granting protection to such couples, courts have held that if the two parties are consenting adults, they have the right to stay with a person of their choice, irrespective of their gender identity or sexual orientation. These cases, often involving young couples fleeing social ostracisation or forced separation, reveal a simple truth: Decriminalisation is not enough. Without legal recognition of queer relationships, queer people remain vulnerable.
Last month, the Madras High Court held that 'marriage is not the sole mode to found a family,' reflecting a reality long lived by queer communities which is often overlooked by the law. The Court's observation came in response to a habeas corpus petition filed by a 25-year-old woman from Tirupathur, who sought the release of her partner from unlawful detention by the partner's family. Rooted in a growing body of queer jurisprudence, the Court recognised the couple's right to form a family beyond the traditional, and arguably limiting, framework of marriage and heterosexual norms. This judgment is significant because it broadens the legal understanding of queer families, making clear that the right to family life is not limited to marriage, nor confined to heteronormative relationships. Grounded in the Supreme Court's consistent affirmation that consenting adults have the fundamental right to choose their partners, regardless of caste, as held in Lata Singh v. Union of India (2006); religion, as in Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K M (2018); or gender and sexuality, as in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018).
Crucially, in Navtej, the Court clarified that the rights of queer persons encompass a broader, affirmative recognition of their right to love, dignity, and self-determination. This reasoning was further extended in Supriyo v. Union of India (2023). In this case, although the Supreme Court stopped short of legalising same-sex marriage, it unequivocally acknowledged the 'right to form intimate associations' as a core aspect of constitutional liberty. Central to its reasoning was also the decision in Deepika Singh v. Central Administrative Tribunal (2022), which expanded the legal understanding of 'family' beyond biological or marital ties, noting that the law must adapt to reflect lived realities, thereby making space for families of choice. The Court also relied on Devu G Nair v. State of Kerala (2023), wherein the Supreme Court had laid out comprehensive guidelines for how courts and authorities should handle cases involving queer couples. As part of the directions, the SC had urged lower courts to act swiftly, avoid bias, ensure police protection where needed, and strictly prohibit attempts to alter a person's sexual orientation or gender identity through 'conversion therapy' practices.
In a legal and social landscape still largely preoccupied with marriage as the benchmark of legitimacy, judgments such as these mark a radical and necessary shift. It transforms constitutional guarantees into concrete protections, especially for those abandoned by family, society, or the state. In doing so, they reinforce that queer individuals are full rights-bearing citizens, entitled not only to protection from harm but also to affirmation, autonomy, and a sense of belonging. Looking ahead, the challenge is not merely to defend these hard-won judicial victories, but to build upon them and ensure that the law does more than shield queer lives.
The writer is a socio-legal scholar working on gender and sexuality rights
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
an hour ago
- New Indian Express
Deputy CM Pawan Kalyan warns anti-socials, trouble mongers
VIJAYAWADA: Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan has issued a stern warning to individuals and groups attempting to disrupt law and order in the State. Underlining the importance of upholding democratic values, he said the government will not tolerate any actions or rhetoric that undermine peace and security. Mentioning recent developments, Pawan Kalyan said the coalition government has already instructed the police to act firmly against anti-social elements. 'We will not spare anyone who creates fear among the public. Rowdy sheets will be opened against such individuals, and strong measures will be taken to control their unlawful activities,' he asserted. Taking a dig at provocative statements made by some individuals, he said, 'Dialogues in films are effective within the cinema hall, but applying them in real life against the law is not acceptable in a democracy. Everyone must respect the law and the Constitution.' He urged citizens to remain vigilant against those who speak in support of disruptive forces. 'People should be cautious of those promoting undemocratic ideas. Supporting anti-social elements or defending their actions is also a punishable offence,' he warned.
Hans India
6 hours ago
- Hans India
Huzurabad MLA Padi Kaushik Reddy arrested over allegations of extortion
In a significant turn of events in Telangana politics, Huzurabad BRS MLA Padi Kaushik Reddy was apprehended by Warangal Subedari Police at Shamshabad Airport. He has since been transported to Warangal for questioning. The detainment stems from serious allegations made by a granite quarry trader, Manoj Reddy, who operates a quarry in Vangapalli, Kamalapur mandal. Reddy's wife, Umadevi, lodged a complaint with the Subedari Police, claiming that MLA Reddy threatened her, demanding a payment of Rs. 50 lakhs. As a result, police have filed cases against the MLA under Sections 308(2), 308(4), and 352 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), encompassing charges of threatening and extortion. The investigation is ongoing as authorities look into the matter.
Time of India
6 hours ago
- Time of India
Telangana HC pulls up govt over delay in opening Alampur govt hospital
Hyderabad: The Telangana high court on Friday came down heavily on the state govt for the 18-month delay in operationalising a 100-bed govt hospital in Alampur, Jogulamba Gadwal district , despite the facility being fully constructed and equipped. A division bench comprising acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Renuka Yara was hearing a PIL filed by Ramchandra Reddy, a social activist and politician from the district. The court expressed concern over the prolonged inaction and directed the govt and relevant departments to file a detailed counter-affidavit within two weeks, explaining the reasons for the delay. The petitioner informed the court that the hospital was built with ₹21 crore sanctioned in 2021, and construction was completed by Oct 2023. However, despite being fully equipped, the hospital has not been made operational. He added that the unused building is now lying vacant and vulnerable to misuse by anti-social elements. Highlighting the demographic and social context, the petitioner noted that Alampur is an SC reserved constituency, home to a large population from Dalit and Backward Classes communities. The absence of a functioning public hospital, he argued, violates residents' fundamental right to health , as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. Due to the non-functional hospital, locals are reportedly forced to travel long distances-to Kurnool, Gadwal, or even Hyderabad-for basic medical care. Taking note of these submissions, Justice Sujoy Paul observed that despite constructing a 100-bed hospital, the state had neither appointed staff nor operationalised services, leaving costly equipment idle and unutilised. The case will be taken up for further hearing after the state submits its explanation.
