In a significant reaffirmation of constitutional values and personal liberty, the Allahabad High Court in Tehseem & Another v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Others (Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 957 of 2025, decided on October 18, 2025) delivered a powerful verdict upholding the right of an interfaith couple to live together free from State interference. The Bench comprising Justice Salil Kumar Rai and Justice Divesh Chandra Samant strongly condemned the unlawful detention of the couple by the police, terming it a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The Court’s ruling is not merely a relief for the petitioners—it is a stern reminder that social pressures or religious differences cannot override fundamental rights. It also underscores the judiciary’s role as a guardian of individual liberty against arbitrary executive action.
Background of the Case
The case arose from a habeas corpus petition filed by Tehseem (petitioner no.1) seeking the release of his wife, Rashmi (petitioner no.2), who had been allegedly detained unlawfully by the police and her family. Rashmi, a Hindu woman, had married Tehseem, a Muslim man, against the wishes of her parents. The marriage led to tensions in their locality in Aligarh, prompting interference from law enforcement authorities.
Earlier, an FIR (Case Crime No. 0461 of 2025) was registered by Rashmi’s father under Sections 87, 352, and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) at Police Station Akrabad, District Aligarh. The FIR alleged wrongful restraint, assault, and inducement—offences often misused to criminalise interfaith relationships.
The petitioner approached the High Court seeking protection and restoration of his wife’s liberty.
Events Leading Up to the Habeas Corpus Petition
On 15 October 2025, during proceedings in a connected Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition (No. 23334 of 2025), the Court had directed that a lady counsellor be appointed to interact with the woman and record her statement under Sections 180 and 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) to determine whether she was acting under undue influence. Importantly, this order did not authorise police custody of the woman or her transfer to a shelter.
However, soon after leaving the Court premises on that day, both Tehseem and Rashmi were abducted by Rashmi’s father with police assistance. Rashmi was forcibly taken to a “One Stop Centre” in Aligarh, while Tehseem was illegally detained at the police station. The couple remained in custody until 17 October 2025, when they were produced before the Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh.
The Magistrate verified Rashmi’s age—19 years and 7 months—and, being satisfied that she was a major acting of her own free will, released her immediately. Despite this judicial order, the police continued to question the couple and kept them under custody until their eventual production before the High Court on 18 October 2025.
Issues Before the Court
- Whether the police were justified in detaining the couple despite judicial confirmation of the woman’s majority and consent.
- Whether “social tension” arising from an interfaith marriage can be a valid ground for curtailing personal liberty.
- Whether such police conduct amounted to a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution.
- What action should be taken against officers responsible for illegal detention and violation of the couple’s fundamental rights?
Court’s Observations
1. The Girl Was a Major and Free to Choose
The Bench interacted with Rashmi and recorded her statements in camera. She reiterated that she was 21 years old, had married Tehseem voluntarily, and was living with him of her own choice. She also confirmed that neither her marriage nor her statements before the Magistrate and the Court were made under pressure or coercion.
The Court emphasised that once a person attains the age of majority (18 years), the right to choose one’s partner is inviolable. Quoting the Magistrate’s verification and noting her appearance, the Court held that Rashmi was clearly an adult in the eyes of the law and “at liberty to go with whomever she wants.”
2. Police Acted Without Legal Authority
The Court found that the couple’s detention from 15 to 18 October 2025 was wholly illegal. The Bench categorically stated that no Court order authorised the police or the girl’s parents to take her into custody or to send her to a shelter home.
The Court observed:
“Apparently, the petitioner no.2 and the girl were in illegal detention from 15.10.2025 till the present moment.”
Such conduct, the judges noted, not only violated the individual’s liberty but also represented a serious abuse of power by the police.
3. “Social Pressure” Cannot Justify Detention
The State attempted to justify its actions by citing social tension due to the interfaith nature of the marriage. Rejecting this argument, the Court held that public sentiment or social disapproval cannot justify infringement of fundamental rights.
The Bench observed in strong terms:
“A detention under social pressure but without authority of law does not make the detention legal but only increases the illegality of detention.”
The Court further remarked that police and administrative officers are duty-bound to protect citizens’ liberty, not to succumb to mob or community pressure.
4. Violation of Article 21 – Right to Life and Liberty
The Court unequivocally held that the illegal detention of the couple constituted a gross violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The right to life and personal liberty, the Bench emphasised, is sacrosanct and cannot be compromised under any circumstances.
The judgment underscores that in a democratic polity governed by the rule of law, every individual’s autonomy in personal matters—including marriage—is protected by the Constitution. The State’s duty is to safeguard liberty, not to interfere with it.
Directions Issued by the Court
After recognising the unlawful detention and violation of rights, the Allahabad High Court issued a series of strong directives:
- Immediate Release: Both petitioners—Shane Ali (Tehseem) and Rashmi—were set at liberty forthwith.
- Police Escort for Safety: The Investigating Officer was directed to escort the couple safely to the destination of their choice to prevent further harassment.
- Inquiry into Police Misconduct: The Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Aligarh, was ordered to hold an inquiry into the illegal detention and submit a report within one month.
- Personal Responsibility of Senior Officers: The SSP, Aligarh, was directed to be personally present before the Court on the next date of hearing (28 November 2025).
- Protection Orders: The Court directed the Commissioner of Police, Prayagraj, and the Senior Superintendents of Police, Aligarh and Bareilly, to ensure that there was no extralegal interference in the couple’s companionship.
- Communication of Orders: The Registrar (Compliance) was instructed to electronically send copies of the judgment to relevant authorities the same day for immediate action.
Conclusion
The decision in Tehseem & Another v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Others stands as a landmark affirmation of personal liberty and secular values. Allahabad High Court’s unambiguous censure of police misconduct demonstrates the judiciary’s role as the ultimate guardian of constitutional freedoms.
The Court’s observation that “the State Government and its law-enforcement machinery are expected to use their power to protect the liberty of a citizen and not to succumb to social pressures” resonates deeply in contemporary India, where interfaith relationships often face societal hostility.
This judgment, therefore, is not merely a relief to one couple—it is a reaffirmation of constitutional faith, reminding both citizens and the State that the rule of law cannot be held hostage to social prejudice.
Important Link
Law Library: Notes and Study Material for LLB, LLM, Judiciary, and Entrance Exams