Author: Sejal Suda, Bhartividyapeth New Law College
Abstract
Live-in relationships, where two adults choose to live together without getting married, are becoming increasingly common in modern India. Although marriage continues to hold deep cultural and religious importance, Indian courts have been called upon to address the legal standing of these relationships within the broader framework of constitutional rights and personal freedoms. While marriage remains deeply rooted in Indian culture and religion, the legal system has gradually recognized live-in relationships under constitutional rights and judicial interpretations, reflecting evolving social realities. This article examines how live-in relationships are recognized under Indian law, focusing on constitutional guarantees, relevant statutes, judicial decisions, and the social context. It highlights key issues such as the protection of individual choice, the legal status of partners, the rights of children born from these unions, and the judiciary’s role in evolving the legal landscape around non-marital cohabitation.
To the point
Live-in relationships in India are neither illegal nor criminal offenses.However, since there is no specific law that governs these relationships, questions remain about rights related to financial support, inheritance, legitimacy of children, and protection from domestic abuse. The Indian judiciary has played a crucial role in addressing these gaps by interpreting existing laws in a way that supports and protects individuals in live-in relationships.
If you want, I can help you expand this into a full article or provide more detailed explanations on any aspect.
Use of legal jagron
Understanding Some Important Legal Concepts Around Relationships and Family.Some legal ideas might sound complicated at first, but they are actually about recognizing and supporting the realities of people’s lives. Let’s explore a few important concepts: presumption of marriage, domestic relationships, illegitimacy, and legal sanction.
Presumption of Marriage: When Living Together Means More Than Just Sharing a Home
Imagine a couple who has been living together for many years, sharing their lives, responsibilities, and even raising children. Even if they never officially got married with a ceremony or legal paperwork, the law sometimes treats them as if they are husband and wife. This is called the presumption of marriage. The idea behind this is simple: if two people live together for a long time in a way that looks like a married couple, the law may recognize that relationship to protect their rights, especially when it comes to property, inheritance, or support.
However, this presumption isn’t automatic. If there is clear evidence showing that the couple never intended to be married or that their relationship was different, the law will consider that too. This principle helps avoid unfair situations where one partner might be left without support or recognition just because there was no formal marriage.
Domestic Relationship: Recognizing Relationships Beyond Formal Marriage
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 introduced a broader way to look at relationships. It uses the term domestic relationship to describe a connection between people who live together and share a life similar to marriage, even if they are not legally married. This means that women in live-in relationships or other close family setups can seek protection under the law if they face domestic violence or abuse.
This concept is important because it acknowledges that not all meaningful relationships fit into the traditional idea of marriage. By recognizing domestic relationships, the law offers a safety net to many women who might otherwise be vulnerable.
Illegitimacy: Moving Beyond Outdated Labels
Illegitimate term carried a lot of stigma and could affect a child’s rights, such as inheritance or social acceptance. Thankfully, modern laws and constitutional principles have moved away from this outdated concept.The focus is on the child’s welfare and rights, not on labeling or discrimination. This shift reflects a more inclusive and fair approach, recognizing that every child deserves respect and protection.
Legal Sanction: When the Law Gives Its Official Nod
Finally, the term legal sanction refers to the official approval or recognition that the law gives to a particular action, status, or relationship. For example, when a marriage is legally sanctioned, it means the state recognizes it as valid and binding. Similarly, legal sanctions can apply to contracts, licenses, or any action that requires formal legal approval.
Having legal sanction is important because it gives certainty and protection. It means that the law supports and enforces what has been agreed upon or established.
The proof
The Indian Constitution, under Article 21, guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, which includes the freedom to choose one’s partner and live with them without interference from society or family. The Supreme Court has consistently emphasized that autonomy and privacy are essential components of personal liberty protected by this article. For instance, in Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M. (2018), the Court reaffirmed that individuals have the right to select their partners even against familial or societal opposition.
Live-in relationships are not illegal in India. There is no law that criminalizes two consenting adults living together. Courts have repeatedly held that such relationships fall within the constitutional right to personal liberty and are not offenses. The Supreme Court in S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal (2010) clearly stated that society should not harass individuals for choosing to live together without marriage.
Regarding protection, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDVA) extends safeguards to women in live-in relationships that resemble marriage. The Supreme Court in D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal (2010) set out criteria to determine if a live-in relationship qualifies as “in the nature of marriage,” including voluntary cohabitation, holding themselves out as spouses, legal age, and living together for a significant time. Only such relationships receive protection under this law.
On the right to maintenance, while Section 125 of the CrPC traditionally applies to legally wedded wives, courts have extended maintenance rights to women in long-term live-in relationships akin to marriage. In Chanmuniya v. Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha (2011), the Supreme Court recognized that denying maintenance to women in such relationships would be unjust, emphasizing the need for the law to evolve with social realities.
Concerning children born from live-in relationships, the Supreme Court in Revanasiddappa v. Mallikarjun (2011) held that such children are legitimate and entitled to inheritance rights under the Hindu Marriage Act, except coparcenary rights in ancestral property. The Constitution mandates equal opportunities for all children regardless of their parents’ marital status.
Finally, courts sometimes presume a live-in relationship to be a valid marriage if the couple has cohabited for a long time. In Badri Prasad v. Dy. Director of Consolidation (1978), the Supreme Court recognized a 50-year live-in relationship as a marriage unless disproved by strong evidence.
In summary, Indian law under Article 21 protects the right of consenting adults to choose their partners and live together without societal or familial interference. Live-in relationships are legal, and certain protections and rights, including maintenance and legitimacy of children, are recognized by the courts depending on the nature and duration of the relationship.
Case laws
1. S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal & Anr. (2010)
• Facts: Actress Khushboo publicly supported live-in relationships and pre-marital sex, leading to multiple FIRs against her.
• Held: The Supreme Court quashed all FIRs, ruling that endorsing or being in a live-in relationship is not a crime and personal choices deserve constitutional protection.
2. D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal (2010)
• Facts: A woman approached the court seeking maintenance under the Domestic Violence Act, stating that she had been in a live-in relationship with the man in question.
• Held: The Court clarified that only relationships resembling marriage qualify under the Act. Casual or financial arrangements do not constitute a “relationship in the nature of marriage”.
3. Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma (2013)
• Facts: A woman living with a married man sought protection under the DV Act.
• Held: The Supreme Court held such live-in relationships cannot be equated to marriage for legal protection but acknowledged the woman’s vulnerability and suggested the need for future legal reforms.
4. Chanmuniya v. Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha (2011)
• Facts: After her husband’s death, a woman lived with her brother-in-law and claimed maintenance under Section 125 CrPC.
• Held: The court decided in her favor and also recommended that Parliament explore the possibility of granting maintenance rights to women in live-in relationships under Section 125 of the CrPC.
5. Badri Prasad v. Dy. Director of Consolidation (1978)
• Held: The Supreme Court presumed a 50-year live-in relationship to be a valid marriage unless disproved, recognizing long cohabitation as raising a marriage presumption.
6. Revanasiddappa v. Mallikarjun (2011)
• Held: Children born from live-in relationships are legitimate and entitled to inherit their parents’ property.
7. Lata Singh v. State of U.P. (2006)
• Held: Adults have the right to cohabit with partners of their choice without state interference. Honor-based violence or harassment against such couples is unconstitutional.
Conclusion
Live-in relationships in India exist within a complex and evolving legal and social framework. Although there is no specific law that defines or safeguards these relationships, Indian courts have acknowledged and protected the rights of individuals in such partnerships under the broader framework of constitutional rights, especially Articles 14, 15, and 21.
Nonetheless, several challenges persist, including ambiguity over property ownership, pension entitlements, inheritance claims, and the exact meaning of “relationship in the nature of marriage.” Women in live-in arrangements often face disadvantages due to societal stigma and inconsistent legal safeguards.
Thus, despite the judiciary’s progressive approach in granting certain rights, there remains an urgent demand for clear legislation that outlines the rights and responsibilities of partners in live-in relationships.
As India navigates the balance between traditional values and modern lifestyles, recognizing consensual adult partnerships without formal marriage marks progress toward legal sophistication and social acceptance. A comprehensive law would not only clarify legal aspects but also protect vulnerable parties, particularly women and children, living in these unions.
Despite legal recognition, live-in relationships still face social stigma in many parts of India due to traditional views on marriage and family. Women in such relationships often encounter vulnerabilities because of inconsistent legal safeguards and societal disapproval. There is also ambiguity regarding property rights, pension entitlements, and inheritance for live-in partners, as no specific comprehensive law governs these relationships.
Need for Legislative Reform
While courts have progressively extended rights to live-in partners, the absence of a dedicated law creates uncertainty and legal challenges. Clear legislation is needed to:
• Define rights and responsibilities of partners.
• Provide unambiguous protection for women and children.
• Clarify property and inheritance issues.
• Address maintenance and social welfare entitlements.
These reforms would help bridge traditional values with today’s changing relationship dynamics, encouraging both social acceptance and clearer legal understanding.
FAQ’S
1. Are live-in relationships legal in India?
In India, if two adults willingly choose to live together without getting married, the law allows it and doesn’t consider it illegal. The Supreme Court has affirmed that adults have the constitutional right to choose their partners and live together without the formalities of marriage. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution safeguards an individual’s right to personal freedom, including the choice to live with a partner of their own will. Thus, living together without marriage is not a criminal offense or illegal, although it may still face social stigma in some parts of the country.
2. Can a woman in a live-in relationship claim maintenance?
A woman in a live-in relationship can claim maintenance, but certain conditions apply. If the relationship is deemed to be “in the nature of marriage” — meaning it resembles a marital relationship in terms of duration, intent, and conduct — she may be entitled to financial support. Courts have recognized such women’s rights under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and relevant criminal procedure codes. This legal protection ensures that women are not left destitute if the relationship ends, provided they can prove the relationship’s marital-like nature.
3. Are children born from live-in relationships considered legitimate?
Indian law acknowledges children born from live-in relationships as legitimate. They are entitled to the same legal rights as those born within wedlock, including inheritance of their parents’ self-earned property. The law recognizes these children’s status to protect their welfare and inheritance rights, ensuring they are not discriminated against due to the marital status of their parents.
4. Can a live-in partner be prosecuted for domestic violence?
Yes, if the live-in relationship qualifies as one “in the nature of marriage,” the partner can be held accountable under the Domestic Violence Act. This means that protection against domestic abuse is available to partners in such relationships, and legal remedies can be sought just as in a formal marriage. The Act defines domestic relationships broadly to include live-in partnerships that resemble marriage, thereby extending protection to victims in these relationships.
5. Can a long-term live-in relationship be presumed to be a marriage?
Indian courts often presume that a long-term live-in relationship, especially when it resembles a marital relationship, can be treated as a marriage unless evidence proves otherwise. This presumption helps protect the rights of partners and children involved and prevents exploitation. However, this is a legal presumption and can be challenged with appropriate proof.
6. Do live-in couples have inheritance rights in each other’s property?
Inheritance rights between live-in partners are not automatically granted. Unlike married couples, live-in partners do not have a codified legal framework ensuring inheritance unless there is a valid will or the relationship is judicially recognized as akin to marriage. Without such legal instruments, inheritance claims remain uncertain and often subject to dispute. Therefore, couples in live-in relationships are advised to make clear legal arrangements to protect their property rights
