Supreme Court Restrains Courts from Ordering Counselling, Issues Landmark Guidelines to Protect Autonomy, particularly with respect to their sexual orientation

  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Publications
  4. /
  5. Case Snippets
  6. /
  7. Supreme Court Restrains...

In Devu G. Nair v. State of Kerala, 2024 INSC 228, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, while hearing a criminal appeal against interim orders of the Kerala High Court in a writ of habeas corpus, laid down important guidelines to safeguard the fundamental rights and dignity of intimate partners and LGBTQ+ persons facing illegal detention. The Appellant alleged that she and X, both women in an intimate relationship, were forcibly separated when X’s parents illegally detained her against her will. The High Court, through one of its interim orders, had directed X to undergo counselling with a psychologist.

The Supreme Court. upon reviewing an interview of X conducted by a member of its e-committee, found that X was not illegally detained, had no intention to marry or cohabit with anyone, and wished to focus on her career. However, the Court upon being informed that the High Court had been issuing orders directing counselling of persons similarly situated, expressed serious concern over the practice of High Courts directing counselling or parental oversight in such matters, cautioning that these could undermine individual autonomy, especially regarding sexual orientation. Criticising such directions for their deterrent effect on such individuals, the Court issued a set of guidelines for handling Habeas Corpus petitions, petitions seeking protection from family or police interference.

Tags:

Let us help you!

If you need any help, please feel free to contact us. We will get back to you within one business day. Alternatively, if you're in a hurry, you can call us now

+91 9052538538
info@karavadi.in

Recent Case Snippets

Promotions don’t satisfy the grounds to attain the posts meant for Direct Recruitment

In Jyostnamayee Mishra v. State of Odisha (2025 INSC 87), the Supreme Court held that no promotion can be claimed to a post reserved solely for direct recruitment… Read more »

S.74 Contract Act | Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Permissible If It’s Not Excessive Amounting To Penalty : SC

In Godrej Projects Development Limited v. Anil Karlekar & Ors (Civil Appeal No. 3334/2023), the Supreme Court ruled that forfeiture of earnest money in property transactions is valid… Read more »

Supreme Court Mandates Holistic Evaluation of Disabilities for MBBS Admissions, Rejects Mechanical Application of Disability Guidelines

In Omkar v. Union of India (2024 INSC 775), the Supreme Court held that MBBS admission for PwD candidates cannot be denied solely on the percentage of disability.… Read more »

Disclaimer

The Rules and Regulations set forth by the Bar Council of India under Advocates Act, 1961 prohibit Advocates or Law Firms from advertising or soliciting work through public domain communications. This website is intended solely to provide information. Karavadi & Associates (“K&A”) does not aim to advertise or solicit clients through this platform. K & A disclaim any responsibility for decisions made by readers/visitors based solely on the content of this website.

By clicking 'AGREE,' readers/visitors agree and acknowledge that the information provided herein (a) does not constitute advertising or solicitation, and (b) is intended solely for their understanding of K & A services. By continuing to use this site, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as outlined in our Cookie Policy.