Andhra HC upholds lesbian couple’s right to live together, parents told not to 'interfere'
Amaravati (PTI): The Andhra Pradesh High Court has upheld the right of a lesbian couple to live together, affirming their freedom to choose partners.
A bench comprising Justices R Raghunandan Rao and K Maheswara Rao was hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by Kavitha (name changed), one of the women, alleging that her partner Lalitha (name changed) was detained by her father against her will and kept her at his residence in Narsipatnam.
The Court on Tuesday further directed the parents of Lalitha not to interfere with the relationship of the couple, asserting that their daughter is a major and can make her own decisions.
The couple has been "living together" for the past one year in Vijayawada.
Based on a missing complaint by Kavitha earlier, police traced Laitha at her father’s home, and rescued her. After that, she was kept at a welfare home for 15 days though she pleaded to the police that she is a major and wants to live with her partner.
Lalitha also lodged a complaint against her father in September alleging that her parents are harassing her over the relationship and other issues.
After the police intervention, Lalitha came back to Vijayawada and started going to work, often meeting her partner.
However, Lalitha’s father once again came to her place and took the daughter away forcibly in a vehicle. He kept her in his custody "unlawfully", Kavitha alleged in her habeas corpus petition.
The father also lodged a complaint with police alleging that his daughter was abducted by Kavitha and her family members.
Jada Sravan Kumar, counsel for Kavitha, pointing out earlier Supreme Court judgments, argued that the detenue has expressed her unequivocal consent to cohabit with the petitioner in a shared household of petitioner's parents and would never want to get back to her parents and other family members.
Kumar also informed the court that Lalitha had also expressed her desire to withdraw the complaint she lodged against her parents if she'd be allowed to live with the petitioner.
The Vijayawada police on Tuesday produced Lalitha before the High Court following the court’s direction.
The Bench while disposing of the petition, also made an observation that no criminal proceedings be initiated against the family members of Lalitha as she was willing to withdraw the complaint.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
CJI's advice to aspirant: Join the bar, become a lawyer, don't hanker for judicial services post
New Delhi (PTI): She came to the Supreme Court seeking a re-evaluation of her paper in the examination for joining judicial services as a magistrate. What she got instead was a rejection — and a candid confession by the Chief Justice that he too had wanted to join the judicial services in his youth but was advised by a senior judge to become a lawyer instead.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi on Friday dismissed a plea filed by Prerna Gupta, the judicial services aspirant.
As Gupta pressed her case, the CJI intervened and said, "Let me share my personal story and I hope you will go happily as we cannot allow your petition."
He recounted his time as a final-year law student in 1984 when he wanted to become a judicial officer. As per requirement, he cleared the written test and was set to appear for an interview.
Judicial services is one of the two routes to become a judge after initially joining as a magistrate in lower court and thereafter rising through the ranks to become judge in a high court and possibly the Supreme Court.
The other route is to join the Bar, which means becoming a lawyer, and after building a reputation be picked from the Bar to become a judge at a senior level.
By the time the CJI's exam results came out, he had started practising at the Punjab and Haryana High Court when he was called for the interview.
The senior-most judge on the interview panel happened to be a judge before whom he had recently argued two significant matters.
"One of the matters was Sunita Rani vs Baldev Raj, where he had allowed my appeal in a matrimonial case and set aside the decree of divorce granted by the District Judge on the ground of schizophrenia," he noted.
Before the interview could take place, the judge called the young Surya Kant to his chamber and asked, 'Do you want to become a judicial officer?'
"I said 'yes.' He immediately said, 'Get out from (my) the chamber.'"
The courtroom fell silent as the CJI Justice described his initial heartbreak.
“I came out trembling. All my dreams were shattered. I thought he had snubbed me and that my career was over,” the CJI said.
However, the story took another turn the following day and the judge summoned him again, this time offering a piece of advice that would change the trajectory of his life.
“He said, ‘If you want to become (a judge), you are welcome. But my advice is, don’t become a judicial officer. The Bar is waiting for you,’” Justice Surya Kant recalled.
The CJI said he decided to skip his interview and didn't even tell his parents at first, fearing their disappointment, and instead chose to dedicate himself to his practice as an advocate.
“Now tell me did I make a bad right or bad decision,” the CJI asked and the litigant lawyer left the court with a smile on her face despite her case being dismissed.
Encouraging the petitioner to look toward the future rather than dwelling on the re-evaluation of a single paper, Justice Surya Kant said, "The Bar has much to offer."
