Want to leave home
5 years ago
Sir I am 21 year old girl. I want to leave my house because my family don't support me in anything. They keep restricting me from doing what I want to do. So I decided to leave house. Is it legally correct to leave house and live life by my own choices and what if my family forcefully tries to take me home back. What legal steps can I take if they try to do any violence or torture with me?
Deepak Yashwantrao Bade
Responded 5 years ago
A.Your query is vise versa effective. If you want to leave your house then no one can force or restrain or obstruct you.but if you want to came back your house then your parents have right to restrain you from enter into house.if they harrash you or torture you then you can file complaint of domestic violence against them.
Helpful
Helpful
Share
A.legally you cannot be prevented from leaving the house and your family members cannot forcefully take you back to the house against your wish. Similarly, you cannot forcibly enter their house against their wish.
Helpful
Helpful
Share
ROBERT D ROZARIO
Responded 5 years ago
A.You are an adult and free to take your own decisions. Your parents cannot confine or restrict you within the four walls of the house. If that happens you need to lodge a complaint against them under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence. Your rights cannot be compromised and neither be subjected to any sort of physical or mental injury. If you've already planned to relocate to another city and start your life independently, and they try to forcibly take you back home, Domestic Violence and Indian Penal Code will come for your rescue.
Helpful
Helpful
Share
Mohd Imran
Responded 5 years ago
A.Yes surely you can live your life as per your own choice and will as the law allows it.
But i would suggest that settle the issue with your family and live with them as they are your family.
But i would suggest that settle the issue with your family and live with them as they are your family.
Helpful
Helpful
Share
A.Dear Madam,
You have attained age of majority and free citizen of India. The supporting judgment is as follows.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Woman, 20, Free To Live With 'Underage' Husband, Rules Supreme Court
An adult couple can be in a live-in relationship even if the man isn't 21 years, the legal age for marriage, the Supreme Court has ruled, telling 20-year-old Thushara that she was free to decide who she wanted to live with.
The high court of Kerala had last year annulled her marriage and sent her back to her father on grounds that the Nandakumar wasn't 21 when they married in April last year.
The Supreme Court also said the high court couldn't have cancelled their marriage on its own under the marriage law, relying on the top court's verdict that allowed a 24-year-old young woman from Kerala, Hadiya, to go with her husband.
In this case, Thushara's father had accused Nandakumar of kidnapping his daughter and got an order from the high court to cancel her marriage with Nandakumar, pointing that he was only 20 years when he married his daughter. The high court had restored the women to her father.
But the Supreme Court ruled that it was sufficient to note that Thushara and Nandakumar were adults.
"Even if they were not competent to enter into wedlock (which position itself is disputed), they have right to live together even outside wedlock," a bench of Justices AK Sikri and Ashok Bhushan said.
The top court noted that the legislature had also recognised "live-in relationship" which has been covered under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005.
"It needs no special emphasis to state that attaining the age of majority in an individual's life has its own significance," the court ruled, elaborating that adults were entitled to make their choices.
"The courts cannot, as long as the choice remains, assume the role of parens patriae (a Latin term that literally translates to parent of the nation)," the judges said. In legalese, it is the doctrine that grants the state its power to protect people who are legally unable to act on their own behalf. Like minors.
It also cited the Hadiya verdict that concluded the court could not assume the "role of a super guardian" for adults.
Hadiya's marriage to a Muslim man, Shafin Jahan, was annulled by the Kerala High Court last year after her father alleged that she had been brainwashed and forced to convert. The father's version was cited by right wing groups to label it as "love jihad", a term used by them to accuse Muslim men of trapping and marrying Hindu women to recruit them for terror.
You have attained age of majority and free citizen of India. The supporting judgment is as follows.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Woman, 20, Free To Live With 'Underage' Husband, Rules Supreme Court
An adult couple can be in a live-in relationship even if the man isn't 21 years, the legal age for marriage, the Supreme Court has ruled, telling 20-year-old Thushara that she was free to decide who she wanted to live with.
The high court of Kerala had last year annulled her marriage and sent her back to her father on grounds that the Nandakumar wasn't 21 when they married in April last year.
The Supreme Court also said the high court couldn't have cancelled their marriage on its own under the marriage law, relying on the top court's verdict that allowed a 24-year-old young woman from Kerala, Hadiya, to go with her husband.
In this case, Thushara's father had accused Nandakumar of kidnapping his daughter and got an order from the high court to cancel her marriage with Nandakumar, pointing that he was only 20 years when he married his daughter. The high court had restored the women to her father.
But the Supreme Court ruled that it was sufficient to note that Thushara and Nandakumar were adults.
"Even if they were not competent to enter into wedlock (which position itself is disputed), they have right to live together even outside wedlock," a bench of Justices AK Sikri and Ashok Bhushan said.
The top court noted that the legislature had also recognised "live-in relationship" which has been covered under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005.
"It needs no special emphasis to state that attaining the age of majority in an individual's life has its own significance," the court ruled, elaborating that adults were entitled to make their choices.
"The courts cannot, as long as the choice remains, assume the role of parens patriae (a Latin term that literally translates to parent of the nation)," the judges said. In legalese, it is the doctrine that grants the state its power to protect people who are legally unable to act on their own behalf. Like minors.
It also cited the Hadiya verdict that concluded the court could not assume the "role of a super guardian" for adults.
Hadiya's marriage to a Muslim man, Shafin Jahan, was annulled by the Kerala High Court last year after her father alleged that she had been brainwashed and forced to convert. The father's version was cited by right wing groups to label it as "love jihad", a term used by them to accuse Muslim men of trapping and marrying Hindu women to recruit them for terror.
Helpful
Helpful
Share
Read Related Answers
Mental Abuse and Harassment by Mother in law
Dear Client,
Such kind of inhuman ill-treatment and emotional harassment by a mother-in-law towards her daughter-in-law deserves stringent action and strong protest by filing a complaint under Sec.12...
Marriage and police related problem
Dear Client,
The Police do not have any authority to interfere or relinquish the marriage of two consenting individuals who have attained majority. In case of false allegations and misuse of power by...
Staying at husband house after court ordered monthly maintenance
Dear Client,
In November 2020, the Supreme Court of India ruled that deserted wives and their children are entitled to alimony/maintenance from their husbands from the date they apply for it in court....
Husband and wife problem
Dear Client,
In case of marital issues, you can approach a family counselor to resolve the matter and seek appropriate assistance.
Hope it helps.
Thank you.
Sapinda relationship
Dear Client,
Under the Hindu Marriage act marrying within your pinda ie Sa- Pinda is prohibited under the sec 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act for the reason that the biological offspring would be genetic...
Read Blogs on Family
Family Lawyers
Find Lawyers by Location
