Major Woman Free To Live As She Wishes, But Not With 20-Year-Old Claiming To Be His Wife: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that while a major woman is entitled to live according to her own wishes and cannot be illegally detained by police authorities, she cannot be permitted to reside as the wife of a man who is below the legally prescribed marriageable age.

A Division Bench of Justice Pranay Verma and Justice Jai Kumar Pillai passed the order while dealing with a habeas corpus petition filed by one Ritesh Katara, who claimed that a woman, described in the proceedings as the corpus, was his legally wedded wife and had been unlawfully detained by police authorities.

The petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking the production and release of the woman. Katara contended that he had married the corpus and that she was being illegally confined by the police. However, during the proceedings, the Court took note of a crucial legal impediment. The petitioner himself was only 20 years old.

The Bench observed that because the petitioner had not attained the legally prescribed marriageable age for a man, the alleged marriage could not be granted legal recognition. The Court specifically recorded that "the petitioner himself is aged 20 years hence his alleged marriage with the corpus cannot be granted legal recognition."

In compliance with an earlier order dated June 1, 2026, the woman was produced before the Court by the State authorities. She was brought before the Bench by Lady Constable Kavita Bhatia and Station House Officer of Khachrod Police Station, Dhan Singh.

The judges personally interacted with the woman to ascertain her wishes. During the interaction, she informed the Court that she wanted to go with the petitioner. Despite her stated preference, the Court held that the legal consequences flowing from the petitioner's age could not be ignored.

The Bench observed that although the corpus expressed her desire to accompany the petitioner, "the fact remains that the petitioner is not of a marriagable age, hence corpus cannot be permitted to be sent with him."

At the same time, the Court underscored the autonomy and liberty of an adult woman. It emphasised that since the corpus was a major, she possessed the right to decide where and with whom she wished to live and could not be subjected to unlawful detention by any authority, including the police.

Highlighting this principle, the Court observed that "considering the fact that the corpus is major she certainly has a right to live as per her wishes and cannot be illegally detained by the Police authorities."

Balancing the woman's personal liberty with the legal bar on recognising the claimed marital relationship, the Court directed that she would remain free to reside wherever she wished. However, the judges clarified that such liberty would not extend to residing with the petitioner in the capacity of his wife.

The order stated that "the corpus would be free to reside as per her wishes but the same would not mean residing with the petitioner as the wife."

To ensure her safety and facilitate the exercise of her choice, the Court further directed the police officers who had produced her before the Bench to escort her to the place where she desired to go.

With these observations and directions, the Court disposed of the writ petition.

Appearing for the petitioner was Advocate Harshwardhan Singh Rathore, while Government Advocate Aditya Garg represented the State authorities.

Case Title: Ritesh Katara v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others

Date of Order: June 5, 2026

Bench: Justice Pranay Verma and Justice Jai Kumar Pillai