Introduction
“Chosen family” is a concept that has been widely recognized by the LGBTQ+ community all across the world, through which the word “family” isn’t restricted to the traditional definition comprising blood relations or marital ties, but rather becomes an all-encompassing word that represents warmth, unity, and togetherness.
The recent judgment by the Madras High Court[1] regarding chosen families, opens before us a gateway of new possibilities surrounding unions of same-sex couples following the Supriyo v. Union of India[2] judgment.
The Famous Court Verdicts on Same-Sex Couples in India
The LGBTQ+ community has been seen in a negative light for the longest time in India, gaining recognition only in recent years due to some landmark precedents which have altered the course of history, from persecution and punishment to understanding and acceptance.
- Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi (2009)[3]
As the first-ever judgment in India that decriminalized homosexuality, stating it to be a violation of the fundamental rights enshrined in our Constitution, this judgment had a significant impact on our society, giving the community the courage to rise and fight the oppression, thereby removing the ban on practicing consensual homosexual sex.
- Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Naz Foundation (2013)
This judgment constituted something similar to “one step forward, two steps backward”, as it recriminalized homosexuality, holding such intercourse to be “against the order of nature”.[4] This raised the question of how to define “nature”- as a representation of the societal norms and values at the time, or as an implication of something which followed the natural law, or something completely different?[5]
- NALSA v. Union of India (2014)[6]
This marked a win for the community after the Suresh Koushal case, paving the way for recognition of transgender rights, ensuring that their fundamental rights were not infringed upon. It allowed them to identify themselves without mandatorily performing sex-reassignment surgery, and also shaped how courts viewed non-binary, gender fluid, and people belonging to the diverse gender and sexuality spectrum, moving forward.
- Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018)[7]
This landmark judgment finally struck down the provision that made homosexuality illegal in India, thereby allowing same-sex couples to freely express themselves. In a unanimous verdict by five judges, that part of Section 377, which prohibited homosexual relations, was declared unconstitutional and violative of the fundamental rights enshrined in Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
- Supriyo v. Union of India (2023)[8]
Popularly known as the “same-sex marriage case”, this judgment discussed heavily the probability of legalizing same-sex marriage in India, which would allow same-sex couples to enter into legal unions. In a very close verdict of 3:2 by the bench, it was held that the right to marriage was not a fundamental right. This shows that although leaps of progress have been made, the discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community is still deep-rooted, and society has yet to wholeheartedly accept them.[9]
Concept of Chosen Families
The Supriyo case left the decision of legalizing same-sex marriage up to the legislative action, which hinged upon societal acceptance of the community in India; however, it doesn’t mean that there aren’t other avenues. The LGBTQ+ community has been ostracized in India for a long time, and although we can see a shift in recent trends, it doesn’t erase the years of abuse and mistreatment. Honor killings, conversion therapies, domestic abuse, corrective rape, workplace harassment etc., the community has faced something akin to a witch hunt in the past, and behind the doors the same mistreatment continues even now when friends and families refuse to accept the gender or sexual identity of the individuals.
Chosen families are one avenue through which LGBTQ+ couples can form unions, which, although unconventional, would provide them a security net from abusive families who oppose their children’s gender or sexual identities.[10] The bonds forged in such families arise out of mutual love and respect, and as the individuals wish to avoid mistreatment as they might’ve faced in the past, we can find that there’s a high degree of understanding and empathy within chosen families, which strengthens the bonds. Family is associated with safety, love, and belonging; it shouldn’t be a place where a person is abused, blamed, and shunned.[11] Chosen family provides the solidarity, camaraderie, and companionship that the individual lacks and yearns for, and such unions are sometimes stronger than even traditional natal families.[12]
Precedents Where Courts Have Recognized Families of Choice
The evolving concept of chosen families offers a reprieve to such individuals, allowing them to choose their own kin and people whom they want to call “family”. Over the past year, we’ve been noticing a shift in the mindset of the courts, and we can see the gradual spread and acceptance of chosen families as a legally recognized concept through some of these precedents.
- K v. State of Kerala (2024)[13]
In this judgment, a habeas corpus was filed by the petitioner, who said that her partner X was being detained forcefully by her parents. However, X confirmed that she was living with her parents on her own volition and that she didn’t wish to reside with the petitioner.
The Kerala High Court in this case recognized the problems faced by the queer community, and discussed about chosen families, defining it to be a “source of immeasurable support, love, mutual aid, and social respect”. It lays down the fact that if individuals do not wish to live with their natal families, they must not be forced to return to such a place.
- Shereena Hakkim v. State (2024)[14]
In this case, the parents filed a petition to get back their daughter, who was staying with her partner. She refused to return because she feared abuse at home, and was made to undergo counselling to change her sexual orientation. The court held that the psychologist’s report was prejudicial, biased, and therefore couldn’t override her autonomous decision to stay with her partner.
This judgment talked about problems faced by the community due to deep-rooted stigma prevalent in society[15], which saw such gender and sexual identities as ‘acts of defiance’ or ‘temporary phases’. It underlined how sexual orientation was tied to a person’s identity, and was not a matter that can be ‘fixed’.
Chosen family plays an important role, as we can see that staying with her partner prevented her from returning home, where she apprehended danger. The emergence of this concept in legal precedents shows how the courts recognize and respect such unions.
- A. v. State (2025)[16]
This latest judgment dealt with a case filed by the petitioner, who asked for the release of Ms. D, who was being held by her father against her will. Ms. D didn’t want to stay with her family as she apprehended danger to life if she stayed at home, facing physical abuse, and would be forced to undergo certain rituals to “become normal”.
In the judgment, the court referenced the Yogyakarta Principles and deliberated on the issue, thereby finally arriving at the conclusion that since Ms. D was an adult, she was free to live her life with her partner notwithstanding her parents’ disapproval of her orientation.
The court held that couples have the right to form a family[17], even if they don’t possess the right to marry, and they discussed chosen family, which was a well-established concept in LGBTQ+ jurisprudence. The chosen family concept could help LGBTQ+ couples to live in a healthy and safe environment, away from abusive natal families.
Conclusion
Chosen families pave a path for members of the LGBTQ+ community to create unions which would offer them a higher degree of protection against ostracization and abuse, thereby fortifying the individuals against mistreatment, offering them shelter from mental duress, and allowing them to flourish in families which accept them unconditionally. Moving forward, the courts and policymakers could focus on providing more protection to individuals through chosen families, and a higher degree of awareness should be spread about this concept to ensure that people are aware of their legal rights and aren’t trapped in abusive households.
The Madras judgment offers an important insight into the right to form a family for the LGBTQ+ couples, consolidating the legal position of chosen families, and setting an invaluable precedent which could help the LGBTQ+ community to move forward in India, towards a future where they would be accepted by society without bias.
Author(s) Name: Ishika Hazra (The West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences)
References:
[1] M. A v. Superintendent of Police, Vellore, H.C.P.No.990 of 2025
[2] Supriyo v. Union of India, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1348
[3] Naz Foundation v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2009 SCC OnLine Del 1762
[4] The Indian Penal Code, s 377.
[5] Vageshwari Deswal, ‘Unnatural offences: Decrypting the phrase, ‘Against the order of nature’’ The Times of India (18 October 2019) <https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/legally-speaking/unnatural-offences-decrypting-the-phrase-against-the-order-of-nature/> accessed 20 June 2025
[6] National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India, (2014) 5 SCC 438
[7] Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1
[8] Supriyo v. Union of India, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1348
[9] TOI Lifestyle Desk, ‘Legal challenges faced by LGBTQ+ couples in India:
Progress and remaining hurdles’ Times of India (15 May 2024) <https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/life-style/relationships/love-sex/legal-challenges-faced-by-lgbtq-couples-in-india-progress-and-remaining-hurdles/articleshow/110137735.cms> accessed 20 June 2025.
[10] Lara Wulleman, Hans Grietens, Ilse Noens and Nicole Vliegen, ‘Be(com)ing Family: A Systematic Review of Stakeholders’ Perspectives on Family in Family Foster Care’ (2025) Child & Family Social Work <https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cfs.13258> accessed 18 June 2025.
[11] Shreyashi Ray, ‘Beyond Marriage Equality’ (2023) Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy <https://vidhilegalpolicy.in/blog/beyond-marriage-equality/> accessed 19 June 2025.
[12] Dani Blum, ‘The Joy in Finding Your Chosen Family’ The New York Times (25 June 2022) <https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/25/well/lgbtq-chosen-families.html> accessed 20 June 2025.
[13] K v. State of Kerala, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 351
[14] Shereena Hakkim v. State, 2024 SCC OnLine Ker 3203
[15] Sensitisation Module for the Judiciary on LGBTIQA+ Community <https://ecommitteesci.gov.in/document/sensitisation-module-for-the-judiciary-on-lgbtiqa-community/> accessed 19 June 2025.
[16] M.A v. State, 2025 SCC OnLine Mad 2542
[17] Sureshkumar, ‘LGBTQIA+ couples have right to find a family: Madras high court’ MSN (Chennai, 6 June 2025) <https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/other/lgbtqia-couples-have-right-to-find-a-family-madras-high-court/ar-AA1G5WcC> accessed 19 June 2025.
