A Single Judge Bench of the Madras High Court, comprising of Justice N. Anand Venkatesh has observed, in a Writ Petition, that Same-sex relationship is a sensitive matter and the said case should be handled carefully and the bench itself requested a psychological session so that each word of the Judgment should be written in that respective manner.
“I would request the psychologist to fix a convenient appointment for the same. I honestly feel that such a session with a professional will help me understand same-sex relationships better and will pave way for my evolution. If I write an order after undergoing psycho-education, I trust that the words will fall from my heart.”
Factual Background
The Petitioners were same-sex couples. They want to live together and enjoy their life happily. The parents of the petitioners opposed their relationship and filed two FIR against them- of which one was related to the missing of their child.
The Court ordered a Psychological session for the petitioner and Respondent and asked the Psychologist to submit the report of the same on the next date- which took place on 28.04.2021.
Submission by the Petitioner
The Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the petitioners were safely taken care of by the NGO and they also continued to talk with their parents on a regular basis. That apart, there was no threat exerted by the police after this Court intervened in this matter. The Petitioner further requested that Court should issue certain guidelines to deal with cases of similar nature so that persons involved in same-sex relationships were treated with dignity and their safety was also ensured.
Submission by the Respondent
The Counsel for the Respondent submitted that the petitioners were continuously in touch with their parents and they were talking on a regular basis over the phone. It was also brought to the notice of this court that the petitioners had continued support of the NGO.
Court Reasoning & Judgment
The Court perused the Report submitted by Ms. Vidya Dinakaran, M.Sc. Counseling Psychology, which consisted of the following four head:
"1- It explains the falsified notions of sex, gender, sexual orientation and the report explains as to how those terms must be understood
2- Described the mental status and the observations made after counselling the petitioners on 13.04.2021
3- Report of the mental status and the observations made, while counselling the parents of the first petitioner on 14.04.2021
4- Report of the mental status and the observations made, while counselling the parents of the second petitioner on 16.04.2021."
The Court also took note of the submissions made by the Psychologist:
“both the petitioners perfectly understand the relationship they have entered into and there is absolutely no confusion in their minds about the same. It is also observed that they have lot of love and affection for their parents and their only fear is that they may be coerced into separation; such a scenario will cause a lot of mental trauma to the petitioners. It has also been observed that the petitioners wanted to continue their education and work simultaneously, to take care of themselves and they also wanted to be in touch with their family members. The petitioners are also willing to wait for their parents, whom they fervently hope will understand the relationship at some future point of time”.
The Psychologist also made a submission in reference to the Respondent- stating that- they were more worried about social stigma and reputation in their society. They had the fear of non-acceptance of their daughter’s relationship. They were also very much concerned about the safety and security of their respective daughters. The Psychologist further explained that:
“One more interesting observation that has been made in the report is that the parents would rather prefer their daughters to live a life of celibacy, which according to them will be more dignified than having a partner of the same sex. They also have serious confusions regarding the lineage, adoption and other normal consequences that follow a heterosexual relationship and as to how the same would apply in a case of same sex relationship.”
The Court appreciated the progress of the case and the involvement of Ms. Vidya Dinakaran for her prompt acceptance of the request made by the Court. The Court took a note of the progress of the case by counseling given by Ms. Vidya Dinakaran and expressed that:
“It must be seen how far the earlier counselling has impacted the minds of the parents and how far they are able to understand the relationship between the petitioners. Obviously, the evolution cannot take place over night and it requires continuous effort to bring in a change. Therefore, this Court deems it fit to direct the parents of the petitioners to undergo one more round of counselling with Counselling Psychologist submit a report before this Court.”
The Court ordered Advocate for the Respondent that the parents shall co-ordinate and intimate a convenient date and considering the ongoing pandemic, the counseling can be held through video conferencing.
The Court- while making reference to the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioners for setting out guidelines in cases of this nature is concerned- held that:
“I want to give myself some more time to churn. Ultimately in this case, the words must come from my heart and not from my head, and the same will not be possible if I am not fully “woke” on this aspect. For this purpose, I want to subject myself for psycho-education with Ms.Vidhya Dinakaran and I would request the psychologist to fix a convenient appointment for the same.”
The Bench posted the matter for further hearing on 07.06.2021 and directed the learned Government Advocate assured that the First Information Report will be closed immediately and reported before this Court.
Case Details
Case: W.P.No.7284 of 2021
Quorum: JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
Read Order@LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :