Judgement of the Day Chinmayee Jena @ Sonu Krishna Jena v. State of Odisha & others.

Case No.: Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 57 of 2020.


Facts

The petitioner, Chinmayee Jena, produced a certification of Gender Dysphoria for a transman and filed a habeas corpus writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution. Jena sought for the production of her partner (Rashmi), alleging that she was being kept away from her. Jena’s relation with Rashmi was not accepted by the latter’s family members. She also stated that the mother and uncle of Rashmi were forcing her to marry someone else. Petitioner claimed that she has a well-settled job in a private company and the couple was enjoying a consensual relationship since 2017. Rashmi’s parents forcibly took her away from the petitioner while they were staying in a live-in relationship.


Judgement

High Court cited the case of Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, in which some part of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code was abrogated, and as a result right of selfdetermination of sex/gender was provided to everyone. Article 14, 15, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, permits the petitioner to a live-in relationship with a person of choice irrespective of the fact that they have the same gender. Along with that, the High Court enunciated that petitioner’s partner will be given the right to remain in touch with her family members as mentioned in Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Petitioner was asked to ensure, he will not create any hindrance in the same.

Recent Posts

See All

©2020 by LAWBHARAT. Proudly created with Wix.com