Author: Aditi Abhinav Dass, Bhagat Phool Singh Mahila Vishwavidyalaya
Abstract
Live-in relationships have increasingly become part of modern Indian society, reflecting changing social attitudes and individual choices. Although Indian courts have consistently held that live-in relationships are not illegal, the absence of a clear statutory framework has resulted in uncertainty regarding rights and responsibilities of the parties involved. While marriage—whether religious or court marriage—enjoys automatic legal recognition, live-in relationships continue to face societal stigma and legal ambiguity. This article examines the legal status of live-in relationships in India, the judicial approach toward such relationships, and the contrast between societal perception and constitutional principles. It further analyses why the lack of legal clarity creates hardship for individuals and argues for balanced guidelines aimed at protection rather than control.
To the Point
A live-in relationship refers to an arrangement where two consenting adults choose to live together without entering into a formal marriage. In India, such relationships are not uncommon, particularly among working professionals and urban populations. Despite this social reality, live-in relationships remain controversial due to traditional beliefs attached to marriage.
The major concern surrounding live-in relationships is not their legality but the uncertainty associated with rights, responsibilities and social acceptance. Unlike marriage, which is governed by clear personal laws, live-in relationships are assessed by courts on a case-by-case basis, leading to confusion and inconsistent understanding.
Use of Legal Jargon
Consenting Adults: Individuals who voluntarily agree to live together.
Personal Liberty: A fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Relationship in the Nature of Marriage: A judicially evolved concept used to assess live-in relationships.
Maintenance: Financial support granted under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Judicial Interpretation: Interpretation of existing laws by courts to address new social realities.
The Proof
Indian courts have repeatedly clarified that live-in relationships are not illegal. The Supreme Court has recognised that two adults living together by choice fall within the ambit of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Parliament has also indirectly acknowledged live-in relationships through the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which extends protection to women in relationships “in the nature of marriage.”
Further, claims for maintenance in live-in relationships were earlier governed by Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. With the introduction of the new criminal procedural law, this provision has now been replaced by Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). Courts may grant maintenance where the live-in relationship is found to be in the nature of marriage and the woman is financially dependent.
However, despite such judicial and statutory recognition, there is no specific legislation exclusively governing live-in relationships, resulting in continued legal ambiguity.
Marriage versus Live-in Relationship: A Legal Comparison
Marriage, whether solemnized through religious rituals or through court marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, is legally valid. Registration of marriage serves as proof but is not a condition for validity. Many marriages of older generations were never registered, yet they remain legally recognised due to performance of customary rituals.
Court marriages are valid even without religious ceremonies because they derive legitimacy from statutory compliance. In contrast, live-in relationships lack both ceremonial and statutory foundations. As a result, courts assess live-in relationships based on conduct rather than status. This explains why marriage enjoys automatic legal recognition, while live-in relationships receive conditional protection.
Judicial Approach: Conduct over Declaration
Courts have consistently held that commitment in a live-in relationship cannot be presumed merely on verbal claims. Instead, commitment is inferred from conduct. Long-term cohabitation, stability, exclusivity, assumption of responsibilities and continuity of the relationship are key indicators examined by courts.
Even where partners are unable to live continuously under the same roof due to professional commitments, courts may still recognise the relationship if there is a clear intention to cohabit and continuity similar to that seen in marriages. Temporary physical separation for work does not negate a genuine live-in relationship.
Case Laws
D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal (2010)
The Supreme Court held that not all live-in relationships qualify for legal protection. The Court laid down conditions to determine whether a relationship is “in the nature of marriage.”
Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma (2013)
The Court clarified that live-in relationships are not illegal but emphasised that only relationships resembling marriage would receive protection under the Domestic Violence Act.
Khushboo v. Kanniammal (2010)
The Supreme Court observed that live-in relationships fall within the ambit of the right to life under Article 21 and cannot be considered immoral or illegal.
Societal Perception versus Court’s Perspective :
Indian society often views live-in relationships through the lens of tradition, morality and social reputation. Marriage is perceived as a symbol of stability and responsibility, whereas live-in relationships are seen as uncertain. Social judgment is frequently harsher on women, increasing their vulnerability.
Courts, on the other hand, adopt a rights-based approach grounded in constitutional values. Judicial reasoning prioritises consent, dignity and protection from exploitation over societal approval.
Challenges Faced in Live-in Relationships
Despite judicial recognition, individuals in live-in relationships often face multiple challenges due to the absence of clear legal and social acceptance. One of the primary challenges is social stigma. Many couples are subjected to moral judgment, social exclusion, and family pressure, particularly in conservative sections of society. This stigma often compels couples to conceal their relationship, which further complicates legal recognition and access to protection.
Another major challenge is the lack of clarity regarding rights and responsibilities. Unlike marriage, where rights related to maintenance, inheritance, and succession are clearly defined, live-in relationships operate in a legal grey area.
Partners may be unaware of their limited legal remedies, especially in cases of abandonment or financial dependency. Women, in particular, are more vulnerable to exploitation due to unequal power dynamics and social bias.
Additionally, the absence of a formal exit mechanism creates uncertainty. While the freedom to leave a relationship is often cited as an advantage of live-in arrangements, sudden termination without accountability may cause emotional and financial distress. These challenges highlight the need for awareness and limited legal safeguards to ensure dignity and protection without imposing rigid regulation.
Way Forward: Bridging the Gap Between Law and Society
To address the challenges associated with live-in relationships, a balanced and pragmatic approach is required. The objective should not be to equate live-in relationships with marriage, but to ensure protection against exploitation and uncertainty. One possible solution is the introduction of limited statutory guidelines clarifying basic rights and obligations, particularly in matters of maintenance, domestic violence, and child welfare.
Legal awareness also plays a crucial role. Many individuals enter live-in relationships without understanding the legal consequences or limitations involved. Awareness programs and legal literacy initiatives can help individuals make informed decisions. Furthermore, responsible media representation can contribute to reshaping societal attitudes by portraying live-in relationships beyond stereotypes.
From a societal perspective, dialogue rather than judgment is essential. Acceptance may not be immediate, but understanding the constitutional principles of personal liberty and dignity can foster gradual change. Ultimately, harmonising societal values with evolving legal realities requires cooperation between the legislature, judiciary, and society. Such an approach can ensure that individual freedom is respected while safeguarding against misuse and injustice.
Need for Balanced Guidelines :
The absence of a clear legal framework creates uncertainty and suffering for individuals in live-in relationships. Balanced guidelines aimed at protection rather than control could clarify basic rights and responsibilities, safeguard women and children, and promote informed decision-making without equating live-in relationships with marriage. Such guidelines can assist authorities in resolving disputes fairly and consistently. They may also reduce misuse of laws and prevent arbitrary decisions. Clear rules can offer legal certainty to individuals. This approach supports social harmony while respecting personal freedom and changing social realities.
Conclusion
Live-in relationships are a social reality that Indian law can no longer ignore. While courts have recognised their legality and extended limited protection, societal acceptance remains constrained by traditional mindsets and lack of awareness. The gap between legality and social legitimacy arises from the absence of clarity rather than the absence of lawfulness. A balanced legal framework that respects personal liberty while preventing exploitation can bridge this gap. Until then, judicial interpretation will continue to play a crucial role in addressing the complexities surrounding live-in relationships in India.
FAQS
Q1. Are live-in relationships illegal in India?
No, live-in relationships are not illegal and are protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Q2. Is registration mandatory for marriage to be valid?
No, registration is proof of marriage, not a condition for its validity.
Q3. Can live-in partners claim maintenance?
Maintenance may be granted in certain cases where the relationship is marriage-like.
Q4. Why does society accept marriage more easily than live-in relationships?
Marriage has a well-established legal and social framework, whereas live-in relationships lack formal recognition and clarity.
Sources
https://indiankanoon.org
https://main.sci.gov.in
