SC Frees Bengaluru Girl From Parents' Illegal Confinement: Details

We all remember Britney Spears’ conservatorship case and the whole ‘Free Britney’ movement. In a similar, dramatic move, a 25-year-old Bengaluru girl was freed from illegal confinement by the Supreme Court of India on Wednesday. 

Calling the detention “illegal”, SC directed her parents to return the woman’s passport and other relevant documents within 48 hours. A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Sandeep Mehta was hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by Dubai-based Kevin Joy Varghese. In his plea, he had alleged that the woman, Meera Chidambaram was being illegally detained by her parents in Bengaluru at her uncle’s house as they weren’t happy with her relationship with him. 

The bench said that the “continued detention of” the woman by her parents “is illegal” and added that they “shall set her at liberty forthwith and she is permitted to proceed further as per her wishes”.

Varghese had previously moved a habeas corpus petition before the Karnataka High Court which recorded her statement on September 27, 2023. Following a direction from the court, the police recorded the woman’s statement in which she had specifically mentioned that she had been detained without her consent. She said that she was called from Dubai on the pretext of her grandfather’s sickness and is now being forced into an arranged marriage. 

Feeling frustrated with the passive approach of HC, Varghese moved to SC. The judges interacted with the girl, her parents, and Kevin’s parents separately in a chamber before ruling that “continued detention by her parents is illegal”. Furthermore, the court said, “A major girl cannot be compelled to do something against her wishes.” The court warned that if its orders aren’t followed, effective immediately, it will initiate suo moto contempt proceedings against the girl's parents.

K'taka HC "lackadaisical approach"

Criticising the Karnataka High Court for its sheer lack of sensitivity and laidback attitude in hearing a Habeas Corpus petition and constantly adjourning the hearing at least 14 times and postponing it indefinitely, the bench noted, “Adjourning the matter on fourteen occasions and now postponing it indefinitely and posting it in the year 2025 depicts a total lack of sensitivity on the part of the high court in such a matter. Not passing appropriate orders at an appropriate stage has contributed to further illegal detention of the detenue.”

The court, reinforcing the importance of life and liberty, added that “when the question of liberty of a person is involved, even a day’s delay counts.”