Jharkhand High Court Upholds the Autonomy of Adult Individuals in Choosing Their Life Partner
W.P.(Cr.) (HB) No. 486 of 2021
By Rishika Sinha
In Pratap Ekka v. State of Jharkhand & Ors., the High Court of Jharkhand reaffirmed the constitutional principle that an adult individual possesses the autonomy to choose their partner and decide with whom they wish to reside. The matter came before the Court through a criminal writ petition filed by Pratap Ekka seeking protection of his relationship with Sadrika Pradhan, an adult woman whose father opposed their association. The proceedings were revived pursuant to directions issued by the Supreme Court of India, which instructed the High Court to reconsider the matter in light of the statement made by the woman before a Judicial Magistrate.
During the proceedings, the Court personally interacted with the petitioner, the woman concerned, and her father. Documentary proof in the form of the matriculation certificate established that Sadrika Pradhan was born on 26 August 1999 and was therefore a major. The Court also noted that she unequivocally expressed her desire to continue her relationship with the petitioner and stated that she wished to accompany him voluntarily. The petitioner, who was likewise a major, informed the Court regarding his educational background and present involvement in his family’s business.
The father of the woman raised concerns regarding the petitioner’s financial stability and prospects; however, he did not dispute that his daughter had attained majority. After considering the statements of all parties, the Bench observed that once an individual attains majority and is capable of making an informed decision, no unlawful restraint can be imposed upon their personal choice. The Court emphasised that the wishes of an adult woman must be accorded primacy, particularly where her decision is made voluntarily and without coercion.
Accordingly, the High Court directed that no obstruction or interference should be caused by the respondent father or any other person in permitting Sadrika Pradhan to join the company of the petitioner. The Officer-in-Charge of Jagarnathpur Police Station was further instructed to ensure that no unlawful hindrance was created against either party. With these observations, the writ petition was disposed of.
The judgment serves as another significant reaffirmation of the constitutional guarantees of personal liberty, dignity, and decisional autonomy under Article 21 of the Constitution. By recognising the independent agency of consenting adults in matters of personal relationships, the Court reiterated the judiciary’s consistent position that societal or familial disapproval cannot override an adult individual’s freedom of choice.
