Madras High Court Recognizes Queer “Chosen Families” Under Article 21
In a landmark 2025 ruling, the Madras High Court affirmed that LGBTQIA+ individuals have the constitutional right to form “chosen families,” protected under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
Introduction
In a powerful step toward legal inclusivity, the Madras High Court recently ruled that queer “chosen families” are constitutionally protected under Article 21, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. This progressive interpretation signals a turning point in India’s approach to family law, especially for the LGBTQIA+ community, whose partnerships often exist outside conventional legal structures.
The Case Background
The case was triggered by a habeas corpus petition filed by a woman seeking the release of her same-sex partner, who was allegedly confined by her biological family due to her relationship. The petitioner requested that her partner be allowed to live freely and safely, without interference or coercion.
A division bench of Justices G.R. Swaminathan and V. Lakshminarayanan presided over the case and issued a forward-thinking ruling that not only provided relief to the petitioner but also acknowledged the wider principle that LGBTQIA+ individuals have the right to freely establish family units based on their own choices.
What Are “Chosen Families”?
“Chosen families” refer to support systems and emotional bonds formed outside traditional biological or marital relationships. These are common among LGBTQIA+ individuals, especially when biological families reject or exclude them.
Unlike traditional families, which are usually defined by law through marriage, birth, or adoption, chosen families are built on mutual support, trust, and emotional commitment. For queer people, they often provide the only safe and affirming space where identity is respected.
Court’s Key Observations
The Madras High Court made several important points that reinforce constitutional protections for queer individuals:
1. Expanding the Definition of Family
The court emphasized that the concept of family should evolve with time. Families are not just limited to those formed by blood or marriage. Chosen families constitute valid social units and deserve the same legal consideration as traditional ones.
2. Autonomy and Consent
The bench asserted that any adult who is of sound mind has the right to choose their relationships and where they wish to live. In this case, the woman’s desire to live with her partner was valid and could not be overruled by parental or societal pressure.
3. Constitutional Protection
By associating the concept of chosen families with Article 21, the Court reinforced the expansive constitutional guarantees of dignity, personal autonomy, and privacy. In doing so, it referred to several landmark judgments, including:
- Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), which decriminalized homosexuality,
- Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right.
Why This Judgment Matters
✅ Legal Recognition Without Marriage
While India does not currently recognize same-sex marriages, this ruling provides a legal framework for protecting queer relationships outside of marital structures.
✅ Encouragement for Law Reforms
The judgment may not be legislative, but it sets the stage for formal policy changes and law reforms, possibly paving the way for civil unions or domestic partnership laws in the future.
✅ Societal Validation
Beyond legal recognition, this verdict sends a strong message to society: that love, care, and support are the cornerstones of family, not just legal formalities or social conventions.
Comparative Global Perspective
Many countries, such as Canada, Germany, and Australia, have moved toward recognizing chosen families by expanding their legal definitions of cohabitation and guardianship. Courts worldwide are gradually accepting that legal protection should be extended to functional, not just formal, relationships.
The Madras High Court ruling places India on a similar trajectory, aligning with global human rights standards and international frameworks like the Yogyakarta Principles, which emphasize LGBTQIA+ rights.
Criticism and Concerns
While the judgment is widely hailed as progressive, it does raise questions:
- Legal Uncertainty: Without a specific law to support the rights of chosen families, much depends on judicial interpretation. Rights concerning inheritance, property ownership, and hospital visitation continue to lack clear legal recognition and remain uncertain.
- Social Acceptance: While legal progress can outpace societal change, many queer individuals continue to encounter stigma and violence, especially in rural or traditionally conservative communities
Role of Law Enforcement and the State
The Court emphasized the responsibility of police and administrative authorities in protecting queer individuals from familial coercion. It instructed police personnel to assist the petitioner and ensure that no undue pressure is exerted by her biological family.
This sets a precedent for proactive policing, where the rights of marginalized individuals are protected even outside the courtroom.
Conclusion
The Madras High Court’s recognition of “chosen families” under Article 21 is more than a legal ruling—it’s a statement of hope and progress. It tells every LGBTQIA+ individual that their relationships are valid, their families are real, and their dignity is protected by the Constitution.
While much work remains—particularly in passing comprehensive laws and ensuring social acceptance—this judgment is a significant milestone. It redefines what it means to be a family in India and reaffirms that love, in all its forms, is worthy of protection.
