Maharashtra: Protect same-sex couples, High Court orders state police

Show sensitivity in the case of same-sex relationships. The High Court on Wednesday directed the state police to protect a same-sex couple, clarifying that they should not misbehave with such couples at the behest of their families.

A bench of Justice Revathi Mohite Dere and Justice Gauri Godse passed the above order after being informed that one of the petitioners was being forced by the police to return to her family. The court was then assured by the police to provide protection to the petitioner same-sex couple.

The 28-year-old petitioner, who lives outside the state, ran away from home in April and came to another petitioner's house in Maharashtra. The couple was accepted by the family of the second petitioner. However, the police alleged that the first petitioner was called to the police station and the statement was recorded within nine hours.

Taking the risk, both the petitioners fled to Karnataka. In Karnataka also, the petitioners have alleged that the first petitioner was called to the police station and the second petitioner was threatened with arrest if she did not return to her family. After being threatened by the police, the first petitioner returned home. However, she was kept there. So she again ran away from home and came to the petitioner in Maharashtra. This time she wrote a letter to the Women's Commission and demanded protection. At the same time, she approached the High Court for protection, expressing fear of being killed.

Both the petitioners are educated and mature. They want to be together. One of them is a 28-year-old double graduate, while the other is a nurse. Their lawyers told the court that after meeting online, both of them fell in love. The court was assured by the police that a police officer will be appointed for the petitioners after court orders and protection orders and they can contact this officer in case of emergency. Moreover, the police assured that protection would also be provided to fetch her necessary documents from the house of the second petitioner. Taking cognizance of it, the court directed the police to conceal the names of the petitioners' residence and current location and not to disclose the information to the family members of the second petitioner.