New Delhi: The case of a woman demanding the release of her same-sex partner that also involves two Aadhaar cards with different dates of birth has prompted the Punjab and Haryana High Court to explore the possibility of a standard operating procedure (SOP) for dealing with protection pleas filed by runaway couples.
Last month, a 21-year-old woman filed a petition in the high court seeking the release of her partner, who she claimed was 19 years old, from parental custody. She alleged that the girl was being beaten by her parents and being forced to get married.
However, while the petitioner was relying on the date of birth stated in her partner’s Aadhaar card to claim that she was a major and was being illegally detained by her parents, the partner’s parents claimed that she was a minor, relying on a separate Aadhaar card.
During the course of hearings earlier this month, the court concluded that the girl was a minor.
In an order passed Tuesday, seen by ThePrint, Justice Sandeep Moudgil asserted that the case was a “glaring example” of a situation in which “not only the customary, moral and ethical values of our heritage are being destroyed but even the parameters of law are also being flouted in a very casual manner”.
The court noted that on an average, 80-90 petitions were being listed in court in which runaway couples were seeking protection after solemnising marriage or wished to stay in a live-in relationship when either of them had not attained the legal age to marry.
It said that such petitions were being filed directly in the high court, after submitting a representation to the police authorities on that very day or a subsequent day.
“This precarious situation needs to be dealt with, as to why citizen in the country are feeling unsafe despite approaching the police authorities in time, which is an issue to be addressed as it is the primary and essential duty of law enforcing agency itself once an application/representation has been received, it should be dealt with in utmost urgency especially where protection of life and liberty is being sought,” the court observed.
The court has now requested the advocate general for Punjab, the advocate general for Haryana and the lawyer for Chandigarh Union territory to assist on the issue. It sought to know whether any SOP was in place or could be put in place for such representations to be effectively dealt with by law enforcement agencies.
The court asserted that such a mechanism was the “need of the hour”, pointing out that such petitions before high courts were on the rise, with petitioners living in other states also approaching the Punjab and Haryana High Court for protection, after getting married in areas under the jurisdiction of the court.
The case has now been listed for 29 January.
Also Read: Not woke on same-sex relationships, says Madras HC judge, wants ‘psycho-education’ session
Two Aadhaar cards
In her petition, seen by ThePrint, the petitioner told the court that her partner was “under constant threat to be married against her wishes and/or physically harmed by private respondents (her parents) and other family members and has sent cry for help to the petitioner”.
The 21-year-old demanded that her partner should be released from the “illegal custody” of her parents, and sought protection of life and liberty for herself and her family.
During a hearing on 4 January, after noticing the two Aadhaar cards, the court directed the Commissioner of Police, Panchkula, as well as the Ministry of Electronics and IT and the Unique Identification Authority of India’s (UIDAI’s) regional office in Chandigarh to provide details of both Aadhaar cards issued in the partner’s name.
At Tuesday’s hearing, the lawyer for the central government submitted a report in a sealed cover giving the information on the basis of which the girl’s date of birth was updated by the UIDAI.
According to the order, the UIDAI told the court that one Aadhaar card prepared in May 2017, in which the girl’s date of birth is stated as 15 June, 2007, was made on the basis of a school certificate. However, the Aadhaar details were updated in November last year on the basis of a birth certificate which showed the girl’s date of birth as 15 June, 2004.
The court noted that the birth certificate was issued in February last year by authorities in Unnao, Uttar Pradesh. This certificate, the court said, was issued after the girl came in contact with the petitioner who had filed the habeas corpus plea.
The court then pointed out that the high court was being “flooded” with several such petitions for release of minors despite the minors being in the custody of their biological parents. It observed that “petitions are moved by strangers claiming to be the next friend or seeking protection to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India”.
‘Matter of serious concern’
In an order passed on 27 December, the high court had noted that the “matter seems to be of serious concern”, after going through transcripts of telephone conversations between the petitioner’s mother and the girl who had been allegedly detained by her parents. It then directed the girl to be produced in court on the next date of hearing.
However, on 4 January, the government lawyer told the court that when the police team visited the native place of the girl who had been allegedly detained, there was resistance by certain co-villagers as well as her parents, and they did not allow her to come to court. As against this, the petitioner’s mother stood by her in court.
The court then directed the Commissioner of Police, Panchkula, to make necessary arrangements for producing the girl in court.
On 15 January, the girl was finally produced in court. However, the court then noted that she was, in fact, a minor aged about 16 years, and that her parents were willing to take her custody with the assurance that no harm would be caused to her. The court then allowed them to take her to her native place in Unnao.
(Edited by Nida Fatima Siddiqui)