Even a single day is one day too many when liberty of a person is involved, the Supreme Court held on Wednesday as it ordered immediate release of a 25-year-old woman illegally detained by her parents to stop her from being with a man of her choice and pursue a career in Dubai.

A bench of justices Bhushan R Gavai and Sandeep Mehta declared that forcible detention of the woman by her parents in Bengaluru for over four months is “illegal” and that she must “proceed further as per her own wishes”.

Warning her parents of inviting contempt of court action if they breach its order, the bench also directed them to return the woman’s passport, her devices and other documents within 48 hours so that she could pursue her career in Dubai as per her volition.

“When the question of liberty of a person is involved even a day’s delay counts,” underlined the top court, adding it was not for any court or parents to take decisions for a major woman regarding her relationships or her choice of career or the place where she wants to stay.

“She is highly qualified. Interaction with her showed that she is mature enough to understand as to what is right and what is wrong for her in her life. In any case a major girl cannot be compelled to do something against her wishes,” highlighted the bench, which interacted with her in judges’ chamber before passing the order.

The court, in its order, also castigated the Karnataka high court, for adjourning the matter for at least 14 times, noting the high court ought to have ensured her release immediately after she made a statement that she wanted to go back to Dubai and pursue her career.

“Adjourning the matter on fourteen occasions and now postponing it indefinitely and posting it in the year 2025 depicts a total lack of sensitivity on the part of the high court in such a matter. As a matter of fact, not passing appropriate orders at an appropriate stage has contributed to further illegal detention of the detenue,” said the bench.

The woman’s boyfriend had approached the Supreme Court, complaining that she was confined to her uncle’s place in Bengaluru by her parents, who did not approve of their relationship. They knew each other for the last nine years while they studied in Dubai and had a steady relationship. Unhappy over this, the parents brought the woman back citing grandfather’s sickness and did not let her go back, as per the plea.

The man first filed a habeas corpus petition in the Karnataka high court in September, demanding her appearance before the judge there. Following a direction of the high court, the police recorded the woman’s statement in which she categorically stated that she was forcibly taken away from Dubai on the pretext of her grandfather’s sickness and that she is being forced to have an arranged marriage. The high court, on October 10, also interacted with the woman but the case was later repeatedly adjourned, compelling the boyfriend to move the Supreme Court.

On January 3, the Supreme Court bench regretted that the high court was hearing a habeas corpus petition “at a snail’s pace”, and asked for the presence of the woman, her parents and the boyfriend before it on January 17. On Wednesday, they were all present. As the boyfriend had a pre-fixed professional engagement, his parents attended the court hearing.

The woman told the judges that although she has all the love and respect for her parents, she would like to go back to Dubai and pursue her career. She also rued that she could not attend at least three interview calls from Dubai because she was under a “house arrest” by her parents. The woman wished to go back to Dubai with her boyfriend’s parents.

The parents, on their part, said that they would first want their daughter to be financially independent before she takes other important decisions about her life. Once she is financially stable, they added, she was free to take whatever decisions she desires.

This, the apex court held, was impermissible since an adult woman could not be forced against her wishes by anyone, including her parents. It directed the parents to not stop their daughter from going wherever she wishes, adding they must also return her passport and other documents since she wanted to go back to Dubai.

In its order, the bench also recorded its “anguish” against the Karnataka high court, which was expected to hear the case next in April 2025. “When, in a habeas corpus petition, she had in unequivocal terms expressed before the high court that she desired to go back to Dubai to pursue her career, the high court ought to have passed the order setting her at liberty with immediate effect,” it noted.

Owing to “such lackadaisical approach”, the bench added, the boyfriend and his parents were compelled to make frequent trips from Dubai to Bengaluru just to ensure the well-being of the woman.

The court has fixed the next hearing of the case on January 22 for ascertaining compliance with its directions.

The proceedings on Tuesday echo the mandate of the Supreme Court in the 2018 Kerala love-jihad case, which had ended with the court restoring the inter-faith marriage of Hadiya who it held was free to follow her pursuits and lead her life her own way. Hadiya’s marriage was annulled by the Kerala high court and she was later kept in confinement by her parents.

The top court, in its judgment, held: “The choice of a partner whether within or outside marriage lies within the exclusive domain of each individual. Intimacies of marriage lie within a core zone of privacy, which is inviolable… Neither the state nor the law can dictate a choice of partners or limit the free ability of every person to decide on these matters. They form the essence of personal liberty under the Constitution.”