Source: The Hindu 

Introduction 

Live-in relationships in India exist in a complex legal and social landscape. While the law has begun to recognize and protect such relationships, societal norms and judicial interpretations often create challenges for couples choosing this path. Recent high-profile cases and court judgments have highlighted the vulnerabilities faced by individuals in live-in relationships, sparking debates about personal autonomy, legal rights, and cultural values. 

What are the Major Cases of Live-in Relationship? 

Aaftab Amin Poonawala v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi (Shraddha Walkar Case): 

• The case involved the alleged murder of Shraddha Walkar by her live-in partner, bringing national attention to the vulnerabilities faced by individuals in live-in relationships. 
• The incident highlighted several legal and social issues: 
  • The need for stronger legal protections for individuals in live-in relationships. 
  • The importance of safeguarding personal data and privacy during criminal investigations. 
  • The societal pressures and lack of legal protection available to interfaith couples and those in live-in relationships. 

Chawali v. State of U.P. (2015):

• In this case, the Allahabad High Court expressed concerns about the potential negative consequences of live-in relationships. 
• Observations by the Court:  
  • The Court acknowledged that not all live-in relationships result in adverse consequences.  
  • However, it noted that such relationships may sometimes lead to situations involving criminal activities or deportation. 
• The Court emphasized the lack of legal parameters to ascertain the intentions of individuals entering into live-in relationships. 
• The Court stated that fundamental rights securing individual liberties should be interpreted from an "Indian perspective," suggesting a cultural context for legal interpretations. 
• The judgment reflected a conservative approach towards non-traditional relationships, emphasizing the primacy of marriage in Indian society. 
• The Court's stance highlighted the legal ambiguity surrounding live-in relationships in India, where such arrangements are not illegal but do not confer the same rights and social acceptance as marriage. 

Lata Singh Case v. State of U.P (2006):

• The Supreme Court of India upheld the validity of inter-caste marriages in this case. 
• The case involved a complaint by Lata Singh against threats from her family directed at her husband. 
• This judgment laid the groundwork for subsequent rulings extending similar protections to live-in relationships. 

Supreme Court Rulings in Post-Lata Singh Case: 

• The Supreme Court extended protections similar to those granted in the Lata Singh case to live-in relationships. 
• The Court stated: "Live-in or marriage-like relationship is neither a crime nor a sin though socially unacceptable in this country." 
• These rulings established that: a) Women in live-in relationships are entitled to protection against domestic violence. b) Children born of such relationships have property rights. 

X v.  State of Madhya Pradesh (M.P. High Court Case 2024): 

• The High Court dismissed pleas from an interfaith couple seeking a) Police protection against the woman's family. b) Registration of their marriage. 
• The Court observed that the union of a Muslim man with a "fire-worshipper" woman is not valid as per Muslim law. 
• The couple failed to prove- a) Financial dependence. b) Long-term residence together. 
• These factors were deemed critical in establishing a relationship akin to marriage. 
• The case highlighted the challenges faced by couples in proving their live-in relationship status due to practical difficulties such as: a) Opening joint bank accounts. b) Cohabiting in India's rental market without proof of marriage or family ties. 

What are the Legal Provisions of Live-in Relationship? 

Constitutional Basis: 

• Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which provides the right to life and personal liberty, serves as the constitutional foundation for the legal recognition of live-in relationships. 
• The Supreme Court of India, exercising its interpretative jurisdiction, has expanded the scope of Article 21 to encompass the right of individuals to cohabit with a partner of their choice, irrespective of marital status. 

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005: 

• Section 2(f) of the Act defines "domestic relationship" to include relationships "in the nature of marriage," thereby extending statutory recognition to live-in relationships. 
• The Act confers upon women in live-in relationships the right to seek remedies against domestic violence, placing them on par with married women for the purposes of the Act. 

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 

• Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which provides for maintenance, has been judicially interpreted to encompass women in live-in relationships. 
• In the case of Chanmuniya v. Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha (2011), the Supreme Court of India held that women in live-in relationships are entitled to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 

Indian Evidence Act, 1872: 

• Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 permits the Court to presume the existence of certain facts, including the presumption of marriage in cases of long-term cohabitation. 
• This presumption has been judicially applied to safeguard the rights and interests of partners in live-in relationships, particularly in matters of property and maintenance. 

What are the Rights and Obligations in Live-in Relationships ?  

Maintenance Rights 

• Judicial interpretations have established that women in live-in relationships are entitled to maintenance under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 
• The entitlement to maintenance is contingent upon the relationship satisfying certain criteria analogous to a marital relationship, as determined by the courts on a case-by-case basis. 

Property Rights 

• While there exists no automatic right of inheritance for live-in partners under Indian law, the Supreme Court of India, in the case of Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal (2010), has held that a live-in partner may acquire rights to property accumulated during the subsistence of the relationship. 
• The acquisition of such property rights is predicated upon the partner's demonstrable contribution to the acquisition of the said property. 

Rights of Children Born Out of Live-in Relationships 

• The Supreme Court of India has accorded legitimacy and inheritance rights to children born out of live-in relationships. 
• In the landmark case of Tulsa v. Durghatiya (2008), the Supreme Court held that children born out of a live-in relationship cannot be deemed illegitimate if the parents have cohabited under the same roof for a considerable period. 

Protection Against Domestic Violence 

• The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 extends its protective ambit to women in live-in relationships. 
• Under the Act, women in live-in relationships are entitled to the following rights: 
  • The right to reside in the shared household 
  • The right to seek protection orders against the respondent 
  • The right to claim compensation for damages suffered as a result of domestic violence 

What is the Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code Bill: Major Provisions Regarding Live-in Relationships? 

Definition and Registration: 

• The Bill defines a live-in relationship as a cohabitation between a man and a woman in a shared household through a relationship in the nature of marriage, provided such relations are not prohibited. 
• Section 378 mandates that parties in a live-in relationship residing in the State of Uttarakhand shall submit a 'statement of the live-in relationship' to the Registrar within whose jurisdiction they reside, within one month of entering into the relationship. 
• Residents of Uttarakhand in live-in relationships outside the State can submit this statement to the Registrar of their respective jurisdictions. 
• Non-compliance with the registration requirement may result in punitive measures, including imprisonment for up to three months, a fine of up to ₹10,000, or both. 

Registrar's Powers and Duties: 

• Section 381 empowers the Registrar to: 
  • Examine the contents of the submitted statement. 
  • Conduct a summary inquiry into various aspects of the relationship, including the marital status of partners, their age, and the nature of consent. 
  • Summon the partners or any other person for verification.  
  • Require additional information or evidence for inquiry. 
• The Registrar, under Section 381(4), shall within thirty days of receipt of the statement:  
  • Enter the statement in a prescribed register and issue a registration certificate, or  
  • Refuse to register the statement, providing reasons in writing for such refusal. 
• The Registrar is obligated to inform the local police station and parents/guardians if any party to the live-in relationship is less than 21 years old. 

Legal Status and Rights: 

• Section 382 stipulates that the incorporation of the statement in the prescribed register is for record purposes only. 
• Section 379 declares that a child born of a live-in relationship shall be deemed legitimate. 
• Section 388 provides for maintenance rights: 
  • If a woman is deserted by her live-in partner, she shall be entitled to claim maintenance.  
  • Such claims may be filed in the competent Court having jurisdiction over the place where they last cohabited.  
  • The provisions of Chapter 5, Part-1 of this Code shall apply mutatis mutandis to such maintenance claims. 

Conclusion  

The legal framework surrounding live-in relationships in India remains ambiguous, often favoring traditional marriage over other forms of partnership. This ambiguity, coupled with societal pressures, leaves many couples vulnerable to discrimination and legal challenges. There is a growing need for clearer, more inclusive laws that balance individual rights with cultural sensitivities, and for societal attitudes to evolve to accommodate diverse relationship choices in modern India.