Right of mature adult to choose partner overrides parental opposition in habeas corpus proceedings.

The petitioner, Neeraj S., filed a writ of habeas corpus alleging that his romantic partner (the "alleged detenue") was being illegally detained by her parents (Respondents 5 and 6) due to their interfaith relationship

The petitioner is working abroad, while the detenue is a nursing student at Pushpagiri Medical College

During online interaction with the Court, the detenue stated she was not under physical restraint but feared future restrictions on her movement and communication if she returned home, noting her parents' disapproval of the relationship which began on Instagram

The parents contended that the relationship was premature, their daughter should focus on her studies, and the petitioner’s interactions with the father had been unpleasant

1. Whether the alleged detenue, being a mature adult, is under illegal detention or subject to unjustifiable custodial restraints by her parents

2. Whether the court should intervene to protect the autonomy and personal liberty of an adult student in an interfaith relationship

The court applied the fundamental principle of personal liberty and autonomy of an adult under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

It emphasized that a mature adult has the right to take conscious decisions regarding their life partners and bears the consequences of those decisions, regardless of parental perception.

The court further utilized the principle of mediation to resolve familial acrimony and the court's power to issue directions ensuring the restoration of personal documents and unhindered movement for an adult individual.

The Court observed that the alleged detenue is a mature adult capable of making her own decisions.

While acknowledging the parents' concerns regarding her education and the short duration of the relationship, the Court held that it cannot substitute its own perception of a "mature decision" for that of the individual.

The Court noted that since the detenue expressed apprehension of future restraint at home, she could exercise her choice to reside in the college hostel for the duration of her course.

To ensure her independence, the Court found it necessary to order the return of her passport and original documents, which were in the parents' possession.

The Court balanced the daughter's autonomy with the parents' obligation by ensuring the parents continue to provide financial support for her studies until marriage, while removing barriers to the petitioner's visitation.

The Court directed: (i) the 6th respondent to hand over the detenue’s passport and original documents to the petitioner's counsel; (ii) the parents to continue providing financial facilities for her hostel stay until her marriage; (iii) college authorities to allow the petitioner to visit the detenue upon proper identification and her consent; and (iv) suggested mediation through the Kerala High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre to resolve family acrimony.