Live-In Relationships in India have gradually gained acceptance, particularly among urban, educated, and younger demographics. Live-in relationships are relationships where two adults above the age of 18, cohabit together without marrying each other. Live-in relationships do not have to be registered and to end the live-in relationship, a divorce is not required.
The legal recognition and support from the judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court of India, have been pivotal in shaping the discourse and rights surrounding live-in relationships.
India’s societal structure has long been rooted in family-oriented values, emphasizing marriage as the cornerstone of legitimate cohabitation. Live-in relationships, seen as a Western concept, faced severe backlash, stigmatization, and moral policing. Despite this, changing socio-economic factors, such as urbanization, education, and financial independence, have contributed to the gradual acceptance of live-in relationships, especially in metropolitan cities.
The judiciary has played a crucial role in challenging traditional perceptions and providing legal safeguards for individuals in such relationships. Through various landmark rulings, the Supreme Court has laid the groundwork for recognizing the rights of partners in live-in relationships in various cases, which have laid down certain conditions for live-in relationships to be considered as relationships in the “nature of marriage”. These are:
- Duration of the Relationship – The couple should have lived together for a significant period of time, like months or years. So, a few weeks, a weekend or a one night stand, do not count as a live-in relationship.
- Socialisation in Public – The couple must socialize publicly with friends, relatives and other people.
- Age – The couple must at the time of entering into the live-in relationship, be above the legally valid age of marriage i.e. 18 years.
- Sexual Relationship – A sexual relationship must be there between the couple that includes emotional and intimate support.
- Financial Arrangement – The couple must have a financial arrangement similar to that of a husband and wife. For example, pooling in resources together or financially supporting each other, through shared bank accounts, assets in joint names, long term business investments, etc.
- Domestic Arrangement – The couple must have a domestic arrangement. For instance, running the household and doing domestic work – cleaning, cooking, upkeep of the house, etc.
- Intention and conduct of the parties – Common intention of the couple as to what their relationship is and their respective roles and responsibilities, primarily determines the nature of that relationship.
- Children – Having children is a strong indication that the nature of the relationship is similar to that of a marriage, and that the participants have a long-term view of the relationship.
Legal Recognition of Live-In Relationships in India
The Constitution of India guarantees fundamental rights to all citizens, including the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. The judiciary has consistently interpreted this to include the right to live with dignity and freedom of choice, forming the basis for recognizing live-in relationships.
Key Supreme Court Judgments on Live-In Relationships
- Badri Prasad v. Dy. Director of Consolidation (1978)
This was one of the earliest cases where the Supreme Court recognized the validity of a prolonged live-in relationship. The Court ruled that a 50-year live-in relationship would raise a presumption of marriage unless proven otherwise. While the case pertained to property rights, it laid the foundation for recognizing live-in relationships in the legal sphere. - Payal Sharma v. Superintendent, Nari Niketan (2001)
In this case, the Allahabad High Court observed that a live-in relationship is permissible under the law and does not constitute an offense. The Court emphasized that two consenting adults have the right to live together without being married. - Lata Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2006)
The Supreme Court, while dealing with an inter-caste marriage case, upheld the right of consenting adults to cohabit without societal interference. Though the case was not directly about live-in relationships, it highlighted individual autonomy and choice in relationships. - D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal (2010)
The Court clarified the term “relationship in the nature of marriage” under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. It laid down specific criteria for live-in relationships to be considered akin to marriage, including:- Both parties must be of legal marriageable age.
- They must have voluntarily cohabited for a significant period.
- They should present themselves as akin to spouses in society. This judgment helped in defining and distinguishing live-in relationships from casual relationships.
- Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma (2013)
This landmark judgment dealt extensively with live-in relationships. The Court outlined the rights of individuals in live-in relationships and provided safeguards under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. It categorized live-in relationships into five types, ranging from long-term relationships resembling marriage to casual relationships. The judgment emphasized protecting women from abuse and ensuring justice for partners left vulnerable after such relationships. - Tulsa v. Durghatiya (2008)
The Court ruled that children born out of live-in relationships would not be considered illegitimate. This was a significant step toward ensuring the rights of children born from such unions, particularly regarding inheritance and societal acceptance. - Khushboo v. Kanniammal (2010)
The Supreme Court dismissed a series of criminal cases against actress Khushboo, who had spoken in favor of live-in relationships. The Court ruled that living together without marriage is not illegal and falls within the purview of individual autonomy guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution.
Rights of Women in Live-In Relationships
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, was a landmark piece of legislation extending protection to women in live-in relationships. The Supreme Court’s interpretation of “relationships in the nature of marriage” has enabled women to claim:
- Protection from domestic violence.
- Maintenance or alimony under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
- Right to residence in a shared household.
These provisions have been instrumental in safeguarding women from exploitation and ensuring their financial and social security.
Rights of Children Born in Live-In Relationships
The judiciary has consistently upheld the rights of children born out of live-in relationships to protect their dignity and future prospects. In SPS Balasubramanyam v. Suruttayan (1992), the Supreme Court ruled that if a man and woman cohabited for a long duration, their children would be considered legitimate under Indian law.
The Hindu Succession Act, 1956, also provides inheritance rights to children born from live-in relationships, further emphasizing the judiciary’s commitment to their welfare.
Challenges and Limitations
Despite judicial recognition and legal protections, live-in relationships face several challenges in India:
- Societal Stigma
Social acceptance remains limited, particularly in rural areas, where traditional norms dominate. - Lack of Comprehensive Legal Framework
While certain rights are recognized under existing laws, there is no comprehensive legislation governing live-in relationships, leaving many gray areas. - Ambiguity in Definitions
The judiciary’s interpretation of “relationship in the nature of marriage” varies across cases, leading to inconsistency in legal protections. - Exploitation and Misuse
Critics argue that live-in relationships may be used to exploit individuals, particularly women, who might face abandonment without legal recourse.
The Way Forward
The growing prevalence of live-in relationships highlights the need for a robust legal framework to address their complexities. Some measures that could be adopted include:
- Comprehensive Legislation
A dedicated law recognizing live-in relationships and addressing associated issues, such as property rights, inheritance, and maintenance, would provide clarity and security. - Awareness Campaigns
Educating the public about the legal recognition and rights associated with live-in relationships can help reduce stigma and societal resistance. - Judicial Consistency
Clear and uniform guidelines from the judiciary can ensure equitable treatment of live-in relationship cases. - Gender Sensitization
Legal and societal reforms must prioritize protecting women and children from exploitation and ensuring their dignity. - Are Live-in relationships illegal in India?
Live- in relationships are not illegal in India. The couple can be of any gender but must be above the age of 18 and give free consent. The Allahabad Court also said that no one, including their parents, can interfere in the lives of a couple who are living in and that live-in couples have the right to life, under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950 where they can live peacefully and without disturbance.
Live-in relationships are a reflection of changing societal norms and the growing emphasis on individual autonomy and choice. While they challenge deeply entrenched traditional values, the judiciary has played a proactive role in ensuring legal recognition and protection for individuals in such relationships. However, the journey toward full acceptance and comprehensive legal recognition is ongoing.
The Supreme Court’s progressive judgments underscore the importance of safeguarding the rights and dignity of individuals in live-in relationships while balancing societal norms. As India continues to evolve socially and culturally, live-in relationships are likely to become an increasingly integral part of its social fabric, necessitating continued legal and societal reforms to address the challenges they pose.
