< Back
High Courts
Article 21 Does Not Cease To Apply When People Of Same Gender Decide To Live Together: Punjab & Haryana HC
High Courts

Article 21 Does Not Cease To Apply When People Of Same Gender Decide To Live Together: Punjab & Haryana HC

Pankaj Bajpai
|
18 Aug 2023 1:00 PM GMT

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that every person in the territory of India has an inherent and indefeasible fundamental right to life flowing from Article 21 of India’s constitution, and the State is duty-bound to protect life.

The High Court held so while considering a claim, where two young adult females who declare their fondness for each other and have been staying together in a live-in relationship for the last four years have sought for protection through the State by invoking their fundamental rights of life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice Anoop Chitkara observed that "Article 21 of the Constitution of India does not cease to apply when people of the same gender decide to live together".

Advocate Japsehaj Singh appeared for the Petitioner, whereas AAG Shiva Khurmi appeared for the Respondent.

The Bench found that the petitioners are above 18 years of age and they are adults and have all the legal rights to live as they desire, so long it does not violate any law.

The Bench stated that their claim of fondness for each other and living together in a live-in relationship prima facie does not violate any provision of law in force.

Love, attraction, and fondness have no boundaries, and not even the boundary of gender. However, some segments of societies cannot keep pace with the boldness of expression, courage not to be subservient, and the rapidly changing ethos and lifestyles that Gen-Z and millennials might like to embrace or follow, including openly proclaiming their attraction towards persons of similar gender”, added the Bench.

Therefore, observing that if the allegations of apprehension of threat to their lives turn out to be true, it might lead to an irreversible loss, the Bench directed the concerned Superintendent of Police or any officer to whom such powers have been delegated or have been authorized in this regard, to provide appropriate protection to the petitioners.

Cause Title: Pooja and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Ors. [Neutral Citation: 2023: PHHC: 105975]

Click here to read/download the Order


Similar Posts