Author: Khadijah Khan, a student at the School of Law, UPES Dehradun
To the Point
Live-in relationships in India, though no longer viewed as illegal or immoral by law, nevertheless remain outside the purview of legal regulation. Though the judiciary has come to view such relationships increasingly through the lens of personal freedom under Article 21 of the Constitution, no uniform codified law sets out, regulates, or standardizes the rights and obligations arising from such cohabitation. This lack of legislative clarity has created disjointed protections, leaving numerous partners in live-in relationships, especially women and children, open to exploitation.
Use of Legal Jargon
Cohabitation: The situation in which two individuals share a living space, like marriage, without being legally married.
Relationship like marriage: A legally acknowledged category under Section 2(f) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDVA).
Presumption of marriage: A principle outlined in Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, permitting courts to infer a marriage if a couple cohabits for an extended period.
Illegitimacy and legitimacy: Legal terms that define a child’s rights concerning inheritance and parental lineage.
Maintenance: A legal entitlement established under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) or personal laws, which provides financial assistance to a dependent partner or child.
Succession and inheritance: The lawful transfer of property after death, which can become a point of contention in live-in relationships lacking official marital status.
The Proof
1. Lack of Legal Acknowledgment
Currently, India does not have any central legislation that explicitly acknowledges or defines a live-in relationship. It is a social and legal phenomenon, but there is no specific legal framework governing it. Unlike marriages, live-in arrangements do not fall under personal law codes such as the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955, the Special Marriage Act of 1954, or Muslim Personal Law, which puts their legal status in a vulnerable position.
2. Safeguards under PWDVA, 2005
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, was the first Indian legislation to implicitly protect women in live-in relationships. Section 2(f) includes a “relationship like marriage.” Such a statute permits such women to seek orders for protection, assert residence rights, seek monetary compensation, and obtain orders of custody. But the onus of establishing that the relationship is like marriage largely rests with the aggrieved party.
Factors that have been set by the court to determine such a relationship are:
- The length of the relationship
- Shared residence
- Emotional and sexual fidelity
- Financial dependence or sharing of resources
- Public recognition and acceptance
- Intention for permanent living together
However, these factors are not statutorily defined and can be variable from one case to another, with unpredictable results.
3. Assumption of Marriage according to the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
According to Section 114, Illustration (a) of the Indian Evidence Act, courts can assume that a man and a woman living together for an extended period are legally married unless proved otherwise. This presumption aids in matters related to inheritance and legitimacy, but it does not grant them marital status.
4. Entitlements of Children from Cohabiting Partnerships
The Indian judiciary has consistently upheld that children born from live-in relationships are legitimate and have the right to inherit their parents’ individually owned property. However, inheritance rights to ancestral or coparcenary property under the Hindu Succession Act of 1956 remain ambiguous unless the union is recognized as a legitimate marriage.
5. Maintenance and Inheritance
Some High Courts have interpreted Section 125 of the CrPC to extend maintenance rights to women involved in live-in relationships, although this remains a matter of judicial discretion. Succession rights for the partners in these relationships are non-existent, as Indian succession laws pertain only to spouses, not cohabiting partners.
6. Lack of Recognition for LGBTQ+ Live-In Couples
After the decriminalization of homosexuality in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, gay couples can now legally cohabit. However, no statutory measures exist that recognize or safeguard their rights of cohabitation, as in the case of heterosexual couples under the PWDVA.
Abstract
Live-in relationships, though no longer considered criminal or taboo within India’s legal system, still face a significant absence of statutory acknowledgment. The judiciary has had to step in to address this legislative gap by interpreting existing laws to safeguard individuals involved in such relationships, particularly women and children. Nonetheless, this protection is often limited, inconsistent, and frequently reliant on the discretion of individual judges. A comprehensive law to govern live-in relationships—similar to domestic partnership laws in other regions—is urgently needed to provide legal clarity and socio-economic security.
Case Laws
1. Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma (2013) 15 SCC 755
The Supreme Court clarified that not every live-in relationship qualifies as a “relationship like marriage.” It established five essential factors: duration, shared household, pooling of resources, sexual exclusivity, and the intention to cohabit. The case also highlighted the issues faced by women who are left after long-term cohabitation without marital rights.
2. Chanmuniya v. Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha (2011) 1 SCC 141
The Court recommended that a more expansive interpretation of Section 125 CrPC be adopted to ensure that women in live-in relationships are not denied maintenance merely because there is no valid marriage.
3. Bharatha Matha v. R. Vijaya Renganathan (2010) 11 SCC 483
The Supreme Court ruled that children born to parents in live-in relationships cannot be deemed illegitimate and have the right to inherit their parents’ self-acquired property.
4. S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal (2010) 5 SCC 600
The Court affirmed the legality of live-in relationships, asserting that societal morality cannot supersede the constitutional rights granted under Article 21.
5. Lata Singh v. State of U.P. (2006) 5 SCC 475
The Supreme Court emphasized that two consenting adults possess the right to cohabit, and any interference by law enforcement or family in such arrangements constitutes a violation of personal liberty.
Conclusion
India’s legal perspective on live-in relationships presents an intriguing contradiction: while courts have attempted to render justice in particular instances, the overarching legal framework remains largely apathetic. There is no legislative support for the rights of partners in live-in arrangements concerning property, inheritance, maintenance, or custody, aside from the sporadic provisions under the PWDVA and general criminal statutes.
This inconsistent approach diminishes the autonomy and dignity of those who choose to live without marriage. As more couples, particularly in urban settings, embrace live-in relationships and societal norms shift, the lack of a cohesive legal framework becomes increasingly apparent.
India requires a dedicated legislative structure, potentially inspired by civil union or domestic partnership laws found in nations like Canada, France, or South Africa. Such legislation should:
- Clearly define live-in relationships
- Outline the rights and responsibilities of partners
- Establish enforceable rights for maintenance, inheritance, and property division
- Guarantee child welfare and legitimacy
- Provide equal protection for LGBTQ+ couples
Only then can we transition from moral oversight to genuine legal safeguards.
FAQ’s
Q1. Are cohabiting relationships lawful in India?
Yes. Cohabitation between consenting adults is legal and safeguarded under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Q2. Is it possible for a live-in partner to seek maintenance?
Yes, if the relationship can be classified as a “relationship like marriage.” Courts may award maintenance under Section 125 CrPC or the PWDVA, 2005.
Q3. What entitlements do children born from live-in relationships have?
They are regarded as legitimate and can inherit property that their parents have acquired individually. However, their claims to ancestral property may face challenges.
Q4. Is there recognition of live-in relationships regarding succession and inheritance?
Not explicitly. Live-in partners do not possess statutory rights to succession, unlike partners in legally recognized marriages.
Q5. Are same-sex cohabiting relationships granted legal protection?
While same-sex cohabitation is not criminalized following the Navtej Singh Johar judgment, current laws do not offer specific legal recognition or protection.
Q6. Is it feasible for live-in couples to adopt children in India?
Although it is theoretically possible, adoption by live-in couples is seldom approved by agencies or courts unless one partner adopts as a single parent.
