“Want psycho-education session on same sex relationships, will pave way for my evolution”: Madras HC Judge to understand same sex relationships better

Dated: April 29, 2021

                                                                                                                                                            - by Megha Bhatia 

On April 28th 2021, Justice N. Anand Venkatesh of the Madras High Court said that he is not completely “woke” to the idea of same-sex relationships and that he would seek education from a psychologist to learn more about it.

According to the Judge, the psycho-education workshop will help him better in understanding same-sex relationships and pave the way for his evolution. 

This occurred at a hearing for a restraining order filed by a same-sex couple.

Two women, a 22-year-old BSc Mathematics graduate and a 20-year-old BA Tamil student, have filed a protection petition in the court. The couple has known each other for two years and expressed their desire to be together, in court. Their respective families have been resisting and putting pressure on them.

Significantly, the Judge had previously requested that the couple and their parents attend counselling in order to properly understand one another. 

Since the parties have made some strides, the Court was requested by their concerned lawyer, to issue recommendations to comply with such situations in the future, ensuring that people in same-sex marriages are handled with respect and their safety is assured.

It is at this juncture that Justice Venkatesh observed, “Insofar as the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioners for setting out guidelines in cases of this nature is concerned, I want to give myself some more time to churn.”

He added, “Ultimately in this case, the words must come from my heart and not from my head, and the same will not be possible if I am not fully “woke” on this aspect. For this purpose, I want to subject myself for psycho-education with Ms.Vidhy Dinakaran and I would request the psychologist to fix a convenient appointment for the same.”

He stated that if writes an order in this regard after undergoing psycho-education, the words will fall from his heart. 

In terms of the parties involved in the litigation, the Court observed that the Petitioner-couple were being taken care by an NGO and that they continue to communicate with their parents on a daily basis.

The parents, on the other hand, had raised reservations about the stigma applied to same-sex couples, as well as confusions about lineage, pregnancy, and other natural implications of a heterosexual partnership. 

In this context, the Court stated that the evolution (of parents) does not happen overnight and that transition takes ongoing commitment.

As a result, it ordered the Petitioners’ parents to go for another round of counselling with the concerned psychologist. “This move becomes very vital since this Court is moving into unchartered waters, and a report from a specialist will provide support to this Court to move forward in this case,” the judge said.

In an order passed on 29 March this year, Justice Venkatesh admitted that he is also trying to break his “own preconceived notions about this issue” and is “in the process of evolving”. He proceeded to say that he is “trying to develop this case brick by brick”.

‘Would rather prefer daughters to live a life of celibacy’

The court went over the study that the counsellor had sent to it in a sealed envelope on Wednesday i.e. April 28th. On the 13th of April, the girls and their families were counselled.

The first section of the report, according to the court, clarified the false notions of identity, gender, and sexual orientation, as well as how those words should be interpreted. The remainder of the report focused on the counsellor’s evaluations of all parties’ “mental states.”

According to the order, the counsellor had opined that the two women “perfectly understand the relationship they have entered into and there is absolutely no confusion in their minds about the same”, and that “they have lot of love and affection for their parents and their only fear is that they may be coerced into separation.”

According to the counsellor's report, the parents were worried about the stigma associated with such a relationship as well as the potential repercussions for their families. Indeed, the parents will “prefer their daughters to live a life of celibacy, which they believe will be more dignified than having a partner of the same sex,” according to the counsellor’s study of their parents.

The families had earlier lodged missing persons report against the two women, which police officials told the court would be “immediately closed” on March 29. The court, however, noticed on Wednesday that this had not yet been done. The legal team, representing the government, later assured them that this will be handled right away.

             Though the Supreme Court read down Section 377 of IPC, which criminalized same-sex adult consensual relationships, in 2018, several same-sex couples still continue to seek protection from the court as their birth families continue to oppose their sexuality.


Top Stories