Author: Javeriya Talat, A student at DES Navalmal Firodia Law College,Pune
Introduction
India has long been a society rooted in cultural and religious traditions that dictate social and familial structures. Women, historically, have faced systemic challenges in exercising autonomy due to patriarchal norms. Practices such as child marriage, sati, and widow exploitation once defined the societal landscape for women. Although many of these traditions have faded, modern India continues to grapple with issues like domestic violence, dowry harassment, gender discrimination, and, notably, the vulnerabilities of women in live-in relationships.
A live-in relationship—a consensual cohabitation of two individuals without formal marriage—is emerging as a new social reality in India. While legally recognised by Indian courts, societal acceptance remains elusive. This lack of recognition often translates into legal and societal gaps that expose women in such relationships to abuse, exploitation, and stigma. This article explores the evolving legal framework for live-in relationships in India, with a focus on the challenges and rights of women within these arrangements.
Legal Context Of Live-In Relationships In India
The legal recognition of live-in relationships in India is primarily derived from the constitutional rights of individuals. Article 19(a) (freedom of speech and expression) and Article 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) provide the foundation for consenting adults to live together without interference. The landmark Supreme Court judgment in Lata Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2006) declared that cohabitation by consenting adults is not illegal.
In subsequent rulings, including S. Khushboo vs. Kanniammal (2010) and Badri Prasad vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation (1978), the judiciary reaffirmed the legality of live-in relationships and recognised them as falling under the ambit of the right to life. Despite these advancements, the absence of a specific legal framework leaves women in such relationships vulnerable to various forms of abuse.
Rights Of Women In Live-In Relationships
The courts have gradually extended certain protections to women in live-in relationships, treating them as relationships “in the nature of marriage” in some instances. Key rights include:
Protection Against Domestic Violence
Under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA), 2005, women in live-in relationships can seek protection from physical, emotional, or economic abuse. In Indra Sarma vs. V.K.V. Sarma (2013), the Supreme Court emphasised that women in live-in arrangements are entitled to legal remedies if subjected to domestic violence.
Right to Maintenance
The judiciary has extended the right to maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to women in live-in relationships. Cases like Chanmuniya vs. Chanmuniya Kumar Singh Kushwaha (2011) clarified that women in such relationships should be entitled to financial support if deserted.
Right to Shared Household
The PWDVA also grants women the right to reside in a shared household, even if they do not hold legal ownership of the property.
Rights of Children Born Out of Live-in Relationships
The legitimacy of children born out of live-in relationships has been upheld in cases like Tulsa vs. Durghatiya (2008), ensuring inheritance and maintenance rights. In its latest judgment on June 2022, Supreme Court in Kattukandi Edathil Krishnan & Another Vs Kattukandi Edathil
Valsan & Others held that children born to partners in live-in relationships can be considered legitimate when the relationship is long-term and not of ‘walk in, walk out’ nature.
.
Visa Extensions
In Svetlana Kazankina vs. Union of India (2010), the Supreme Court acknowledged the rights of live-in partners by allowing visa extensions for foreign partners, setting a progressive precedent.
Despite these protections, societal attitudes toward live-in relationships remain deeply entrenched in moral judgment, often translating into limited access to justice for women in such situations.
Challenges Faced By Women In Live-In Relationships
Social Stigma and Victim-Blaming
Women in live-in relationships often face societal judgment and moral scrutiny. The brutal murder of Shraddha Walkar in Delhi highlighted this pervasive stigma. Instead of focusing on the crime, public discourse often shifted to questioning the victim’s character and her decision to cohabit with her partner. This victim-blaming normalises abuse and discourages women from seeking justice.
Legal Gaps in Protection
Although live-in relationships are legally recognised, they lack a comprehensive regulatory framework. Unlike married women, live-in partners are not automatically entitled to rights such as property inheritance, spousal privileges, or straightforward legal recourse in cases of abuse.
Presumption of Consent to Abuse
The societal assumption that women in live-in relationships “deserve” abuse or have implicitly consented to it perpetuates a dangerous narrative. This normalization of violence further isolates victims and complicates their access to justice.
Economic Vulnerabilities
The absence of formal registration for live-in relationships often leaves women economically vulnerable. If abandoned, they may struggle to claim financial support or property rights, despite judicial efforts to bridge these gaps.
Gendered Violence
Women in live-in relationships frequently report experiencing verbal, emotional, physical, and sexual abuse. The intimate nature of such arrangements, coupled with societal indifference, creates an environment where abuse can go unchecked.
Judicial Evolution And Case Laws
The Indian judiciary has played a pivotal role in extending protections to live-in partners, especially women. Important case laws include:
D. Velusamy Vs. D. Patchaiammal (2010):
This case outlined criteria to determine whether a live-in relationship qualifies as a relationship akin to marriage under the PWDVA.
Ajay Bhardwaj vs. Jyotsana (2016):
The court reiterated that women in live-in relationships are entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC.
Lalita Toppo vs. State of Jharkhand (2018):
The Supreme Court ruled that live-in partners are entitled to relief under the Domestic Violence Act, ensuring their right to reside in a shared household.
These rulings demonstrate the judiciary’s commitment to adapting the law to societal changes. However, judicial intervention alone is insufficient without corresponding legislative action and societal awareness.
Suggestive Measures
Comprehensive Legal Framework
There is a pressing need for a separate legal framework to address the specific challenges faced by live-in partners. This could include mandatory registration of live-in relationships, akin to marriage registration, to ensure accountability and legal recourse in cases of abuse or abandonment.
Awareness Campaigns
Societal attitudes toward live-in relationships must shift through awareness campaigns that challenge patriarchal norms and promote gender equality.
Strengthening Laws Against Abuse
Existing laws should be strengthened to address the unique vulnerabilities of women in live-in relationships. This includes clearer guidelines on property rights, inheritance, and protection against economic exploitation.
Empowering Women Economically
Providing financial literacy and economic empowerment programs for women can help them negotiate relationships on equal footing, reducing dependence on abusive partners.
Challenging Stereotypes
Educational and media initiatives should aim to dismantle the stereotype that women in live-in relationships are morally or socially inferior. Recognising such relationships as a valid personal choice is key to ensuring equality and dignity.
Conclusion
Live-in relationships are not merely a reflection of modernity but also a means for individuals to explore companionship and compatibility without the constraints of traditional marriage. While the judiciary has made significant strides in recognising and protecting the rights of live-in partners, particularly women, societal acceptance remains a formidable challenge.
Legal protections must be accompanied by a cultural shift that respects personal choices and condemns abuse in all its forms. Women in live-in relationships do not forfeit their dignity or rights by choosing a non-traditional path. Their autonomy, safety, and well-being must be prioritized, both legally and socially, to ensure that live-in relationships become a space for equality and mutual respect rather than vulnerability and exploitation.
As India progresses, it is imperative to foster a society where women, regardless of their relationship status, can live free from fear and prejudice. Addressing the challenges of live-in relationships with empathy and legal precision will mark a significant step toward achieving this goal.
Frequently asked questions (FAQS)
Are individuals who live together as a couple in live in relationship liable to any punishment?
The Apex Court in it’s various rulings has clarified that Live in relationship is not a criminal offence but rather a fundamental aspect of the right to life and therefore it cannot be held illegal. The Supreme Court in it’s judgment dated 28.04.2010 in the matter of “S. Khushboo vs. Kanniammal & Anr.”, observed that live- in relation between two adults without formal marriage cannot be construed as an offence.
What is the legal age for live-in relationship in India?
Two consenting adults above the age of 18 can cohabit together without marrying each other
Is live-in relationship considered as marriage in India?
Supreme Court in both the judgments, Badri Prasad v. Deputy Director Consolidation (1978) as well as in SPS Balasubramanian v. Suruttayan (1993), noted that if a man and a woman have resided together for a long duration of time, the legislation will assume them to be legally married unless the reverse is proven. Though there is a strong presumption which favours marriage, it is arbitrable. The person who contradicts the same will bear the burden of proof.
