look news india
Prayagraj. A legal dilemma has arisen in Uttar Pradesh regarding live-in relationships, which has raised big questions before both the society and the judiciary. Recently, two such decisions have come from the Allahabad High Court, which appear to be completely opposite to each other. In both the cases, the lovers were married and had sought police protection citing threat to their lives, but two different judges of the court interpreted the law in their own ways. This contradiction has sparked a debate whether the right to personal liberty is greater than marital laws?
Argument of the first bench: ‘It is the duty of the state to protect adults’
This legal dispute started on March 25. Justice J.J. A case from Shahjahanpur came before the division bench of Justice Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena. Here an 18 year old girl was living in a live-in relationship with a married man. The girl’s family had filed an FIR against the man accusing him of kidnapping and luring her.
Considering the seriousness of the matter, the bench adopted a clear stand. The court said that if two adults are living together of their own free will, it cannot be considered a crime, even if one of them is married. The court said in strong words that it is the basic duty of the state to protect the lives of such couples. The court accepted his plea for protection and termed the interference as wrong.
Second bench’s decision: ‘Live-in cannot be recognized without divorce’
Just three days after this decision, on March 28, in another case, a single bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Singh gave a completely opposite opinion. Here also a married man was living with another woman without getting a divorce. When a request for protection was made, the court rejected it.
Justice Singh argued that if a man is already married, he cannot live with another woman as ‘husband and wife’ without legally divorcing his wife. Terming it an ‘illegal relationship’, the court said that accepting such a petition would be a violation of the rights of a legally married spouse. According to the Court, personal freedom cannot be above the social and legal structure of marriage.
Supreme Court’s old orders and confusion
This is not the first time that there has been a tussle in the courts on live-in. The Supreme Court ‘S. In cases like ‘Kushboo vs Kaniyammal’ it has been said that living together of adults is a part of their privacy (Article 21) and morality cannot be imposed through law. Whereas, ‘Indra Sharma vs. V.K.V. In Sharma’s case, the court had also made it clear that live-in does not automatically get the status of marriage and in the case of a married partner, it can also come under the ambit of ‘bigamy’.
Society caught between law and morality
Different High Courts of the country are also divided on this. The Bombay High Court often considers this a violation of the wife’s rights, while the Madras High Court gives priority to consent. The Punjab and Haryana High Court found a middle path and gave protection to the couples, but also ordered to start the divorce process.
The real crisis is for those couples who are living under social fear and threats like honor killings. Experts believe that ‘legality of relationship’ and ‘safety of life’ should be two separate issues. Even if a relationship is legally complex, no one can be subjected to violence.
Conclusion: What is the way forward?
These two decisions of Allahabad High Court have made it clear that the line between live-in relationship and married rights is very blurred. Until any clear guideline or new law comes from the Supreme Court, the decisions of the courts will continue to oscillate between personal considerations and legal nuances. For now, the message is this—in India you have the freedom to choose your partner, but whether the law will protect you depends on which judge your file is before.