Adult Woman Can Choose Whom To Live With, Father Cannot Restrain Her: Allahabad High Court In Interfaith Couple's Plea

The Allahabad High Court has held that a major woman has the legal right to decide whom she wants to live with and cannot be forced to remain with her father merely because he opposes her choice of partner.

Court made the observation while allowing a habeas corpus petition filed by Gurpreet Singh on behalf of his wife, Princy, who alleged that her father was illegally detaining her because he objected to her relationship with a Sikh man.

The bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi ordered that Princy be set at liberty from her father's custody. Court recorded that she subsequently joined Gurpreet Singh. The judgment was delivered on September 11.

Hindu-Sikh couple married in temple; father challenged marriage

According to the petition, Princy came into contact with Gurpreet through social media in February 2025. She left her parental home on September 19, 2025 and began living with him in Noida.

Princy is Hindu, while Gurpreet follows Sikhism. The petition said her family opposed their relationship. The two claimed to have married at a temple in Noida on November 4, 2025 and thereafter lived together as husband and wife.

Princy's family later called her home for Rakshabandhan. The petition alleged that she was detained by her father and other family members thereafter.

She sent messages to Gurpreet complaining that she was being assaulted and harassed and asked him to rescue her. Gurpreet approached the police but, according to the petition, received no relief before approaching the high court.

When Princy was produced before the court, she categorically stated that she wanted to live with Gurpreet and that her father was preventing her from joining him.

Father questioned validity of temple marriage

Princy's father opposed the habeas corpus plea, arguing that the couple had not stated that saptapadi, or the ceremony of taking seven steps around the sacred fire, had been performed. He therefore questioned whether their marriage was legally valid.

The father relied on the Allahabad High Court's earlier judgment in Shruti Agnihotri v. Anand Kumar Srivastava (2024), which had considered the requirement of ceremonies for a valid Hindu marriage, as well as Manoj Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. (2006).

Court, however, said those decisions arose from materially different facts. In both cases, the alleged wife herself had denied or disputed the marriage. In Princy's case, she was maintaining that she had married Gurpreet and was herself asking to live with him.

Court said precedents must be applied in their factual context and cannot be treated like statutory provisions.

Major woman has right to choose where to live

Justice Vidyarthi said the question of whether Princy's marriage was valid did not have to be decided in the habeas corpus proceedings.

"When the parties to the marriage are not disputing the validity of their marriage, this Court cannot examine this disputed question of fact raised by the father," court said.

It further held that "whether the marriage of the detenue is valid or not", being a major, she had the legal right to choose not to reside with her father and he could not force her to live with him.

Court relied on the Supreme Court's decisions in Soni Gerry v. Gerry Douglas (2018) and Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M. (2018), which recognise an adult's autonomy and the role of habeas corpus in protecting a person's liberty.

Court noted that in a habeas corpus proceeding, its role is to produce the person before it, ascertain the person's independent choice and ensure release from illegal restraint.

"Once that aspect is clear, the enquiry and determination have to come to an end," the Supreme Court had held in Shafin Jahan, as quoted by the high court.

The high court found that Princy, a major, had clearly stated that she wanted to live with the person she claimed to have married and that her father was detaining her against her wishes. It therefore allowed the petition and directed her release.

Case Title: Smt. Princy Thru. Her Husband Gurpreet Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. & 3 Others

Bench: Justice Subhash Vidyarthi

Order Date: September 11, 2026