This paper examines the evolution, legal framework, and societal perceptions of
live-in relationships in India. Despite being controversial in a culture where
marriage is a sacrosanct institution, live-in relationships are gaining
acceptance, especially in urban areas. This research analyzes the legality of
live-in relationships, associated rights, and their position within the Indian
legal system and society.
Introduction
Live-in relationships, although difficult to define precisely, refer to domestic
cohabitation between two unmarried individuals. These arrangements, particularly
prevalent in metropolitan areas, represent a significant shift from traditional
marriage norms. Unlike marriage, live-in relationships allow separation without
state intervention, which is crucial in a country like India, where divorce is
often stigmatized.
Marriage in Indian culture has historically been a sacred bond since Vedic
times. While the institution of marriage has evolved, the current generation is
more accepting of cohabitation outside
wedlock. However, live-in relationships, despite their perceived comfort and
independence, come with their share of legal, societal, and emotional
complexities.
Marriage vs. Live-in Relationships
In Indian tradition,
marriage is a legally binding and socially sanctioned relationship.
It involves customs and rituals that create both legal and societal obligations. By contrast,
live-in relationships are not formally recognized as legal unions in India. However,
the Supreme Court of India (S.C.) has ruled that live-in relationships, though unconventional, are neither
illegal nor criminal offenses.
Key Legal Precedents
- Payal Sharma vs. Nari Niketan: The Allahabad High Court ruled that a man and woman
could live together without marriage, asserting their right to personal freedom under the Constitution.
- Velusamy vs. D. Patchaiammal: The S.C. stated that live-in relationships akin to marriage
could be presumed valid if the couple cohabited for a long time and presented themselves as spouses to society.
- S. Khushboo vs. Kanniammal: The S.C. held that consensual adult relationships outside
marriage do not violate any law.
While live-in relationships do not carry the same societal and legal weight as marriage, courts have provided certain protections, particularly for women.
Essential Factors for the Legitimacy of Live-in Relationships
- Age of Consent: Both partners must meet the legal age for marriage (18 for women and 21 for men),
as established in Payal Katara vs. Superintendent Nari Niketan Vihar Agra.
- Significant Period of Cohabitation: Section 2(f) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA)
mandates that the relationship must last for a "significant or reasonable period" to qualify as a domestic relationship.
Casual relationships or one-night stands do not meet this criterion.
- Voluntary Cohabitation: The couple must willingly live together with a shared intention to cohabit.
The relationship should demonstrate mutual responsibility, financial sharing, and loyalty. Relationships based on
exploitation or servitude are not considered equivalent to marriage.
Legal Provisions Supporting Live-in Relationships
- Constitutional Provisions:
- Article 21: The right to life and personal liberty encompasses the right to choose one's partner and cohabit without societal or legal constraints.
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005:
Section 2(f) provides legal remedies for women in live-in relationships facing domestic violence.
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 125 of the CrPC entitles women in live-in relationships to claim maintenance.
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Section 114 allows courts to presume marriage in cases of long-term cohabitation, protecting the rights of partners, especially in property and maintenance disputes.
Societal Perceptions of Live-in Relationships
Despite legal recognition, live-in relationships remain contentious in India. In metropolitan areas, such arrangements are more common,
with individuals often viewing them as trials for compatibility or alternatives to traditional marriage. However, conservative sections
of society continue to perceive these relationships as immoral.
Case Study: Indra Sarma vs. V.K.V. Sarma (2013)
The S.C. categorized live-in relationships into five types, highlighting their varying complexities. It noted that relationships
between two unmarried adults were the least controversial, while those involving a married individual were fraught with legal and ethical issues.
Challenges and Limitations
- Societal Stigma: Live-in couples often face social ostracism, particularly in rural and semi-urban areas.
- Legal Grey Areas: The absence of a comprehensive law governing live-in relationships creates ambiguity in areas such as inheritance and child custody.
- Exploitation: In some cases, live-in relationships are exploited for personal gain, lacking the mutual respect and commitment associated with marriage.
Conclusion
Live-in relationships represent a significant shift in the social fabric of
India. They provide individuals the freedom to choose their partner and
lifestyle without societal interference. While legal protections have evolved to
safeguard the rights of individuals, particularly women, societal acceptance
remains limited.
For live-in relationships to gain broader legitimacy, there needs to be greater societal awareness
and legal clarity. Ultimately, the choice between marriage and cohabitation should rest with
individuals, free from societal judgments or legal inequities.
Written By:
- Mili Goyal,
- Namisha Singh Chauhan and
- Muffadal Amin
Law Article in India
You May Like
Please Drop Your Comments