Partner Can't Invoke Habeas Corpus To Claim Right To Live-In Relationship With Adult Woman Willingly Living With Parents: AP High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that a writ of habeas corpus is not maintainable at the instance of a person claiming to be in a relationship with a major woman living with her parents, unless there is prima facie material to show that she is under illegal detention. The Court observed that a daughter living with her mother and brother in the parental house ordinarily does not amount...
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that a writ of habeas corpus is not maintainable at the instance of a person claiming to be in a relationship with a major woman living with her parents, unless there is prima facie material to show that she is under illegal detention.
The Court observed that a daughter living with her mother and brother in the parental house ordinarily does not amount to illegal detention.
Dismissing a habeas corpus petition, the Court held that photographs and WhatsApp chats allegedly evidencing a relationship, without any material indicating that the woman was being detained against her wishes, were insufficient to invoke the writ jurisdiction.
A Division Bench of Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari and Justice Subhendu Samanta dismissed the writ petition.
The Court observed:
"The petitioner and the alleged detenue might have lived or living in a relationship and might have their intentions to marry in future but merely based thereon, there cannot be a right to maintain the Habeas Corpus unlessthe material placed before the Court is such that the Court comes to the conclusion that there is an illegal detention.
We are not oblivious of the law on locus standi to maintain a writ of Habeas Corpus but when it comes to seeking production or release of a girl living with the parents, and the writ petition is by a person claiming to be a boy friend, living in 'live in relationship' as alleged the very basic ingredient for issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus deserves to be carefully and strictly scrutinized."
The petitioner sought the release of a 22-year-old woman through a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that she was being illegally detained by her mother and brother. He relied upon photographs and WhatsApp messages to contend that they were in a consensual relationship and wished to continue their future life together.
Examining the material placed on record, the High Court found that neither the photographs nor the WhatsApp conversations suggested that the woman was under any forceful restraint or that she wished to leave her parental home. The Court noted that there was no prima facie material indicating that her stay with her mother and brother was against her free will.
The Bench reiterated that the essential requirement for a writ of habeas corpus is illegal detention and that, although the scope of the writ has expanded over time, it cannot be invoked in the absence of material establishing unlawful restraint.
It further held that “the petitioner could not claim his choice to live in a relationship with the detenue by taking recourse to a writ of habeas corpus”.
The Court also found that there was no factual foundation supported with sufficient material to establish violation of the detenue's fundamental rights under Article 21 or any illegal custody by her mother and brother.
Observing that habeas corpus is a writ of right but not a writ to be issued as a matter of course, the High Court dismissed the petition while leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue any other remedy available under law.
Case Title: Mogal Shuaibulla Baig v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 16987 of 2026
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Y. Swaroop Sai