Himachal Pradesh High Court’s Stand on Habeas Corpus Petition
The Himachal Pradesh High Court recently turned down a habeas corpus petition filed by a man seeking to free a married woman with whom he claimed to have been in a live-in relationship. The judgment, delivered on May 14 by Chief Justice GS Sandhawalia and Justice Bipin Chander Negi, declared the petition inadmissible. The Court noted that the woman resided with her husband and child, thus making judicial intervention inappropriate in such matrimonial matters.
Court’s Position on Matrimonial Disputes
“We are of the considered opinion that the petition is not maintainable in the present form, as admittedly the detenue is living with her husband, and it is not for this Court, as such, to intervene in matrimonial issues inter se the detenue and her husband,” the Bench stated in its order. The Court emphasized its inability to provide judicial approval to what appeared to be an adulterous relationship.
Details of the Petition
The petitioner, claiming to be a close friend of the woman, alleged that she was detained illegally by her husband and mother-in-law. He cited messages from the woman expressing fear of her husband and mother-in-law as justification for seeking her release. However, the Court questioned the nature of his relationship with the woman, revealing an alleged live-in relationship and an agreement dated December 17, 2025.
Legal Precedents and Court’s Analysis
The petitioner’s legal counsel referenced the Supreme Court’s decision in Devu G Nair vs. State of Kerala & Ors, which established guidelines to protect intimate partners’ dignity and address illegal detention, including cases involving the LGBTQ community. Nevertheless, the High Court clarified that the cited Supreme Court ruling was irrelevant because it concerned an unmarried woman living with her parents, not a married woman residing with her husband.
Conclusion and Legal Representation
Concluding its review, the Bench dismissed the petition due to its lack of maintainability. “In such circumstances, we dismiss the petition in limine on account of lack of maintainability,” the Court remarked. The petitioner was represented by Advocates Ankit Dhiman and Hemant Kumar Thakur, while Additional Advocate General Rakesh Dhaulta appeared for the respondent.
