Chandigarh: Choice of partner central to personal liberty, rules High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that no person can be compelled to enter into a matrimonial alliance against his or her wishes.

Holding that the choice of whether, when and with whom to marry lies at the centre of personal liberty guaranteed by the Constitution, the High Court has directed the Mohali SSP to examine a woman’s plea alleging threats and coercion by her parents, maternal uncles and other relatives to marry a man of their choice.

Justice Deepak Gupta observed that every major individual had a fundamental right to life, liberty, dignity, privacy and autonomy under Article 21 of the Constitution.

“The freedom to make choices concerning one’s personal life, including the decision whether, when and with whom to marry, forms an intrinsic part of such constitutional guarantee. No person can be compelled to enter into a matrimonial alliance against his or her wishes,” the Bench observed.

The court was hearing a petition filed by an MBA graduate who said she had been residing independently in connection with her employment and further studies.

The petitioner’s counsel contended that her parents, maternal uncles and other relatives were pressuring her to marry according to their wishes. The petitioner alleged that around two months ago she was forcibly taken to her parental home and subjected to physical assault, intimidation and threats with the object of compelling her to accept the proposed marriage. Despite her categorical refusal, the pressure and threats allegedly continued.

She further stated that a representation, dated June 10, was submitted to the Senior Superintendent of Police, seeking protection, but no effective action had been taken on her request.

Considering the matter, Justice Gupta said the court was not required to adjudicate upon the correctness or otherwise of the allegations levelled by the petitioner against the private respondents.

The court observed that its limited concern was to ensure that any genuine apprehension regarding the petitioner’s life and personal liberty was appropriately examined by the competent police authorities in accordance with law.

Disposing of the petition, the Bench directed the Mohali SSP or an officer duly authorised by him to consider the representation and assess the threat perception to the petitioner.

The court ordered that appropriate protective measures should be taken forthwith in accordance with law, if it was found that there existed any real threat to her life or personal liberty.