<p>Chennai: Though the Supreme Court may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples, they can very well form a family, the Madras High Court has held and allowed a young woman to join her female partner and said the two women can constitute a family.</p>.<p>A division bench of Justices G R Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan said the expression "family" has to be understood in an expanded sense. </p><p>Hearing a writ petition seeking to produce before court a 25-year old woman and set her at liberty, the bench said: "To a specific question from us, the detenue (the 25-year old woman) replied that she is a lesbian and in relationship with the writ petitioner." </p><p>She made it clear to the court that she wanted to go with the petitioner. She confirmed the allegation that she is being detained against her will by her natal family.</p>.V-C appointments: Tamil Nadu moves SC challenging Madras High Court's stay order.<p>"It appeared that she was forcibly taken to her home and beaten. She told us that her natal family members forced her to undergo certain rituals so that she will become "normal". She even apprehended danger to her life." </p><p>In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner has nowhere described the true nature of her relationship with the detenue." </p><p>Even in her complaint to the police, the petitioner called herself as the detenue's close friend. We can understand the hesitation on her part. </p><p>Further, the court said: "While Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty Vs Union of India (Supreme Court) may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples, they can very well form a family. Marriage is not the sole mode to found a family." The concept of "chosen family" is now well settled and acknowledged in LGBTQIA+ jurisprudence, the court said adding the petitioner and the detenue can very well constitute a family.</p>.<p>Justice Anand Venkatesh, Judge of Madras HC, in Prasanna J Vs S Sushma approved a "Deed of familial Association" that purported to recognise the civil union entered into between LGBTQAI+ partners.</p>.<p>The Supreme Court, in NALSA and Navtej Johar case, declared that sexual orientation is a matter of individual choice and that it is one of the most basic aspects of self-determination, dignity and freedom. It is an integral part of personal autonomy and self-expression and falls within the realm of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.</p>.<p>The High Court, in its judgment dated May 22, 2025 said: "Since we have satisfied ourselves that the detenue wants to join the petitioner and that she is being detained against her will, we allow this Habeas Corpus petition and set her at liberty. We also restrain the detenue's natal family members from interfering with her personal liberty." Also, the court directed the police to provide protection to the detenue as well as the petitioner as and when required. </p>
<p>Chennai: Though the Supreme Court may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples, they can very well form a family, the Madras High Court has held and allowed a young woman to join her female partner and said the two women can constitute a family.</p>.<p>A division bench of Justices G R Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan said the expression "family" has to be understood in an expanded sense. </p><p>Hearing a writ petition seeking to produce before court a 25-year old woman and set her at liberty, the bench said: "To a specific question from us, the detenue (the 25-year old woman) replied that she is a lesbian and in relationship with the writ petitioner." </p><p>She made it clear to the court that she wanted to go with the petitioner. She confirmed the allegation that she is being detained against her will by her natal family.</p>.V-C appointments: Tamil Nadu moves SC challenging Madras High Court's stay order.<p>"It appeared that she was forcibly taken to her home and beaten. She told us that her natal family members forced her to undergo certain rituals so that she will become "normal". She even apprehended danger to her life." </p><p>In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner has nowhere described the true nature of her relationship with the detenue." </p><p>Even in her complaint to the police, the petitioner called herself as the detenue's close friend. We can understand the hesitation on her part. </p><p>Further, the court said: "While Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty Vs Union of India (Supreme Court) may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples, they can very well form a family. Marriage is not the sole mode to found a family." The concept of "chosen family" is now well settled and acknowledged in LGBTQIA+ jurisprudence, the court said adding the petitioner and the detenue can very well constitute a family.</p>.<p>Justice Anand Venkatesh, Judge of Madras HC, in Prasanna J Vs S Sushma approved a "Deed of familial Association" that purported to recognise the civil union entered into between LGBTQAI+ partners.</p>.<p>The Supreme Court, in NALSA and Navtej Johar case, declared that sexual orientation is a matter of individual choice and that it is one of the most basic aspects of self-determination, dignity and freedom. It is an integral part of personal autonomy and self-expression and falls within the realm of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.</p>.<p>The High Court, in its judgment dated May 22, 2025 said: "Since we have satisfied ourselves that the detenue wants to join the petitioner and that she is being detained against her will, we allow this Habeas Corpus petition and set her at liberty. We also restrain the detenue's natal family members from interfering with her personal liberty." Also, the court directed the police to provide protection to the detenue as well as the petitioner as and when required. </p>