The Delhi High Court has granted protection to a same-sex interfaith couple, where one was a Hindu woman and other was a Muslim. It was alleged that the petitioners apprehended threats from the family members of one of the petitioners.

Noting the submissions made by the Additional Standing Counsel for the State, a bench of Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar thus observed, “…the IO (Investigation Officer) is directed to provide the mobile phone numbers of the concerned SHO (Station House Officer) as well as of the beat constable to the petitioners so that in case of any distress, they could reach either to the concerned SHO or to the beat constable”.

Senior Advocate Arundhati Katju appeared for the petitioners, and Advocate Amol Sinha, Additional Standing Counsel appeared for the State

In the present matter, the petitioners were a same-sex interfaith couple, where one woman belonged to the Hindu (petitioner 1) religion while the other to Muslim (petitioner 2), contended that they are major and are living together with their consent. However, the same is being objected to by the respondent nos. 2 to 5 (family members of the Hindu petitioner). Therefore, it was alleged that the Muslim woman and and her family have apprehension of harm from the family of the Hindu woman.

The present petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 CrPC by the petitioner, seeking directions to the Delhi Police to grant protection to the Petitioners to secure their right of life and liberty guaranteed by the Constitution of India.

Furthermore, directions were sought to provide protection to the parents of the petitioner no. 2 against the respondents and interlopers, and further protection to friends and organizations assisting the petitioners to secure their right of life and liberty.

The Additional Standing Counsel submitted that on May 15, 2023, the Delhi Commission for Women has received the complaint. Furthermore, that the mobile numbers of the concerned SHO and beat constable will be provided to contact if they encounter any difficulties.

Therefore, while noting the submissions, the bench further directed that in case the petitioners change their place of residence, the SHO concerned is to inform the SHO of that area in which the petitioners will reside in future.

Cause Title: Mansi Verma & Anr V. State (Nct Of Delhi) & Ors.

Click here to read/download the Order




Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar

Agatha Shukla