This article is written by SNEHALI CHAKRABARTI,PRESIDENCY UNIVERSITY BANGALORE,BBA LLB(9th SEMESTER).
- ABSTRACT
In India, live-in relationships are becoming increasingly popular as a convenient alternative to marriage. Domestic cohabitation between adult couples who are not married is defined. It seems to be a stress-free companionship with not any strict legal compulsions; but, it has several complications, responsibilities, and duties which are legal as well. In recent times, several attempts have been made to take it within the umbrella of certain laws and regulations. It is no longer a crime in India, and various Apex Court decisions have issued many guidelines concerning maintenance, property, and the legal status of a child. It is still a debatable issue in India. There are many unidentified areas which need appropriate attention like official documentation, cultural issues, property rights, will and gift rights, anti-religion status, LGBT community.
The primary goal of this article is to understand the concept of a live-in relationship using secondary sources. Following that, an attempt was made to study the couples’ problems and challenges using descriptive and analytic methodology. Finally, the article argues for creating a separate, secular, and gender-sensitive law for couples who choose to cohabit in a live-in relationship.
Keywords: live-in relationship, property, maintenance, same-sex, child rights
- INTRODUCTION
A live-in relationship is considered to be when two people live together outside the performance of marriage. Various countries around the globe have already recognized and legalised the concept. According to the Supreme Court, “for a man and a woman in love to live together is part of the right to life”; thus, a live-in relationship is no longer illegal. In 2003, the Malimath Committee paved the way for landmark recommendations. It is important to note that it primarily clarifies the term “wife” and considers a woman in a live-in relationship to be a wife. Following that, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA) 2005, widely regarded as the first piece of legislation, provided legal recognition to relationships other than marriage by classifying them as ‘like marriage’. Many attempts have been made to bring it under the umbrella of certain laws, such as domestic violence, maintenance, property, and a child’s legal status, to regulate the changing aspects of this new social order. Still, it is always controversial on moral and social grounds, and it remains a taboo in India.
Marriage has been recognised as a sacred oath in Indian culture ever since the Vedic time. The concept of marriage has evolved. Marriage and relationship concepts have evolved in tandem with the advancement of society and human psychology. The idea and concept of cohabitation is more generous and liberal in today’s generation. Though it appears to be a quiet, comfortable, and relaxed companionship with no legal obligations to each other, it has many complications, responsibilities, and legal liabilities.
- OBJECTIVE OF RESEARCH
a. To define the concept of a Live-in –Relationship.
b. To Study and analyze the legal status of live-in relationships in India.
- RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In this article, the research approach taken is predominantly doctrinal. The main focus is on grasping the essence of the concept, laws, Acts, books, news, and cases related to live-in relationships in India. The objective of this paper is to understand the complexities of this evolving social spectacle. Moving from the theoretical exploration, the study dives into practical scenarios by scrutinizing the problems and challenges faced by couples in live-in relationships. This assessment is facilitated through an amalgamation of descriptive and analytic methodologies and by providing a more inclusive understanding of the dynamics at play.
As we navigate through the complexities faced by couples who voluntarily choose to embrace this modern trend of cohabitation, the article contends the necessity for crafting a distinct, secular, and gender-sensitive legal framework. It fosters legislation that takes into account the special requirements and difficulties faced by couples in cohabiting relationships while acknowledging the evolving nature of social structures. To put it just the research aims to connect with the real-world observations of people navigating the unfamiliar waters of live-in relationships in addition to trying to understand the theoretical foundations. The article seeks to advance a more nuanced understanding of the topic by fusing a theoretical framework with practical insights, opening the door for discussions on the legal ramifications of live-in partnerships in India.
- HYPOTHESIS
Through notable advancements made in acknowledgment and defense of the rights of those involved, India’s legal environment associated with cohabitation is changing. However, certain grey areas persist, particularly regarding cultural, property, and gender-related aspects. The establishment of a comprehensive and separate law addressing these complexities would contribute to a more equitable and secure framework for couples in live-in relationships.
- RESEARCH QUESTIONS:
- To what extent has the legal status of live-in relationships in India evolved over the years?
- What are the roles of law in the context of the Domestic Violence Act and Criminal Procedure Code, address issues related to maintenance, property rights, and child custody in the context of live-in relationships?
- What are the legal implications of children born out of live-in relationships, and how do property rights and inheritance laws apply to them?
- CONTENT
- Laws related to Live-in relationship: There is no specific law governing or relating to a live-in relationship. However, to protect women from being exploited in the name of a live-in relationship, or to protect women who enter a live-in relationship on the promise made by a man that he will marry, or to protect the rights of children born from this type of relationship. As a result, specific laws to protect the rights of children and women are mentioned in various acts.
- Domestic violence Act 2005: The Domestic Violence Act of 2005 was the first to recognise live-in relationships for the rights and protection of women who live with men without marriage. Section 2(f) of this Act discusses the domestic relationship, which is defined as a relationship between a man and a woman who live together in a house and share the household and are either married or have the nature of marriage. It did not specifically mention live-in relationships, but laws and sections are sometimes made to be interpreted, so the phrase “nature of marriage” is left up to interpretation by the court. In addition, it safeguards the rights of women in such relationships.
- Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: Section 125 of the CrPC addresses maintenance for a wife, children, or parents. It defines wife as a lady who was in a live-in relationship but was now abandoned by the partner; in other words, if the lady is in a live-in relationship for a specific time, she can acquire the rights as a legitimate spouse and can also claim maintenance under this section.
- Evidence Act, 1872: This Act also not specifically talks about the live-in relation but the Act talks about the may and shall presumption. If the man and a woman are or were in a live-in relationship for a specific time then there is an assumption of marriage.
- LEGALITY OF LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP
In its various judgments, the Supreme Court has stated that if a man and a woman live as husband and wife in a long-term relationship and even have children, the judiciary will presume that the two are married and that the same laws will apply to them and their relationship. The concept of a live in relationship was recognised in Payal Sharma v. Nari Niketan[1] by the Allahabad High Court, where it is observed by the Bench consisting of Justice M. Katju and Justice R.B. Misra that, “In our opinion, a man and a woman, even without getting married, can live together if they wish to. This may be regarded as immoral by society, but it is not illegal. There is a difference between law and morality.” Afterwards, in S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal & anr[2]case, the Supreme Court observed that live- in relation between two adults without formal marriage cannot be construed as an offence. Further, it is added that there was no law prohibiting live-in relationships or pre-marital sex.
Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees right to life and personal liberty as a fundamental right. In Ramdev Food Products (P) Ltd. v. Arvindbhai Rambhai Patel[3], the Court observed that two people who are in a live-in relationship without a formal marriage are not criminal offenders. Therefore, live-in relationships are legal in India.
- ADULTERY
The third category defined under the preceding categories is debatable because it permits a married adult woman to live with an unmarried adult male, which was previously considered an offence under section 497 of the Indian Penal Code. However, in Joseph Shine vs Union of India[4] a five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court on 27 September 2018 unanimously ruled to scrap Section 497, and it is no longer an offence in India. It has been argued that the section violates two articles of the Constitution of India; Article 14, “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India” and Article 15 “The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.” While reading the judgment, Chief Justice Dipak Misra said, “it (adultery) cannot be a criminal offence,” however it can be a ground for civil issues like divorce.
D. LANDMARK CASE ON LIVE IN RELATIONSHIP:
S.Khushboo v. Kanniammal:- In this case the Supreme Court held that if two adults decided to live together it’s their right to life which is given under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution therefore live-in relationship cannot be unlawful or illegal.
Court has also mentioned some of the key points to consider the relationship between a couple as live in relationship which are as follows:
- Time period of relationship: Domestic Violence Act states that “at any point of time”, hence the time period of relationship depends on fact and situation of different cases.
- Sharing households: To claim for the rights and protection the couple who is living together should be sharing their household chores like a married couple.
- Resource and Financial issues: If the couple has brought a property jointly or share the finance they can claim for their rights.
- Physical Relationship: If the couple is not just living together but also having a physical relationship then they claim for their rights and their relationship is called a live-in relationship.
- Children: If there are children from a live-in relationship it is the clear sign of “nature of marriage”.
- Socialisation: If the appearance of a man and a woman is as a couple in the society and people consider them as husband and wife, they can claim for the rights.
Children born out of live in relationship: The tag or status of illegitimacy can ruin someone’s life specially if the tag is on a child, this may spoil the development and growth of children and can scare them for life. There to protect the children from such issues, courts consider the child as legitimate who are born out of live in relationship. There are certain cases which talks about the status of such children:-
S.P.S.Balasubhramanyam v. Suruttayan: This was the first case where the Court considered the child born out of live-in relationship as legitimate. In this case the Court held that if a man and a woman are living together and having physical relationship for a certain period of time, it is presumed under the Evidence Act that they are husband and wife and since they are considered as husband and wife the children born from such relation is legitimate and legal.
Tulsa v. Durghatiya: In this case the Supreme Court held that the children who are born out of a live-in relationship cannot be considered as illegitimate from now on. The main condition for such consideration is that the parents must have lived together in one house and had a physical relationship for such a period of time to convince the society that they are husband and wife.
Bharatha Matha v. R. Vijay Renganathan: Supreme Court held that to protect the children from the tag of bastard by making the interpretation of law broad, especially if there is no fault of the children. The Court held that such children may claim for the inheritance of property from the parents. The property can be self-acquired or ancestral.
E. LEGAL STATUS AND PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CHILDREN BORN OUT OF LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP
a. Legal status: The Supreme Court in Tulsa v. Durghatiya[5] held that a child born out of such a relationship would no longer be considered as an illegitimate child. The noteworthy prerequisite for the same is that the parents must have lived under the same roof and cohabited for a significant period which proves their sincerity towards the relationship.
S.P.S. Balasubramanyam v. Suruttayan[6] was the first case which approves the legitimacy of children born out of a live-in relationship. The Supreme Court held that “if a man and woman are living under the same roof and cohabiting for some years, there will be a presumption under Section 114 of the Evidence Act that they live as husband and wife and the children born to them will not be illegitimate.” Additionally, the Court also interpreted Article 39(f) of the Constitution of India which direct its policies towards securing that children are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity and that childhood and youth are protected against exploitation and against moral and material abandonment.
b. Property rights: The Supreme Court in Revanasiddappa v. Mallikarjun approved the inheritance to the four children born out of the live-in relationship by considering them as ‘legal heirs’. Therefore, the Court has guaranteed that no child may be denied their inheritance who are born out of a live-in relationship of a significant period of time. In Bharatha Matha v. R. Vijaya Renganathan[7], case also the Supreme Court provided legitimacy to a child born out of a live-in relationship in the eyes of the law and held that he might be allowed to inherit the property of the parents. The Supreme Court held that a child born out of parents in a live-in might be allowed to inherit the property of the parents if any, but does not have any claim upon Hindu ancestral coparcenary property. Top of Form
F. MAINTENANCE
The Malimath Committee, formed in November 2000 to recommend reforms in the criminal justice system, submitted a report in 2003 that included key proposals for offenses against women. Notably, it suggested amending Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) related to maintenance rights for neglected and dependent wives, children, and parents. The committee advocated broadening the definition of ‘wife’ in Section 125 to include women living with a man akin to a wife for a substantial period. However, the criteria set by the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDVA) raised concerns, as it required factors like right age, mutual consent, a significant duration, and social status, excluding shorter relationships or those based solely on sexual desire.
In legal precedents, the Supreme Court, in Chanmuniya v. Chanmuniya Kumar Singh Kushwaha, rejected the notion that only legally married women can claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. The court asserted that women in live-in relationships are entitled to the same claims and reliefs as legally wedded wives. Yet, conflicting views emerged in Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma, where the court acknowledged the limitations of relief for women aware of their partner’s existing legal marriage. Despite this, the court emphasized the need to extend the scope of ‘domestic relationships’ under Section 2(f) of the PWDVA, especially for dependent, poor, illiterate individuals and their children, highlighting the necessity for comprehensive legal protection.
G. ISSUES AND CHALLENGES OF LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP
Although, the live-in relationship has been legalised and many judgements are in favour of it, yet even now there are many issues which need a pivotal discourse. Some of the most complexes grey areas that still need to be addressed amicably are discussed below:
1. Societal and Moral Acceptance:
– Despite legal recognition, live-in relationships face societal taboos in India.
– Couples encounter challenges such as family rejection, housing difficulties, societal disapproval, and workplace negativity.
2. Official Documentation Challenges:
– Lack of official recognition for live-in relationships in India leads to problems in joint accounts, nominees’ names, insurance, visas, and other official documents.
3. Cultural Complexity:
– Diverse cultural and religious backgrounds in India contribute to varying perspectives on live-in relationships.
– Anti-religious marriage is governed by the Special Marriage Act, but acceptance depends on cultural beliefs more than legal provisions.
4. LGBTQ Concerns:
– Despite the decriminalization of consensual same-sex relations, India does not recognize same-sex marriage or provide legal support for LGBTQ couples in live-in relationships.
– In-laws and legal judgments often overlook the rights and provisions for LGBTQ couples.
5. Property Rights Challenges:
– Inheritance and property rights, particularly regarding ancestral property, are inadequately addressed in live-in relationships.
– Current laws provide limited property rights, primarily in Hindu law, with no provisions for the LGBT community.
6. Gender Bias in Legal Framework:
– The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA) 2005 primarily favors women in live-in relationships, lacking provisions for men or same-sex couples.
– Issues of sexual abuse and deception are not adequately addressed for men and within same-sex partnerships, necessitating the need for separate legislation.
Overall, addressing these societal, legal, and cultural complexities is crucial to ensure comprehensive and equitable frameworks for live-in relationships in India.
- CONCLUSION
The phenomenon of live-in relationships, though an unconventional concept in the cultural milieu of India, has witnessed a global proliferation. This trend is notably propelled by the contemporary lifestyle characterized by a reluctance to assume the responsibilities associated with traditional, committed relationships a shift catalyzed in part by the swift influence of globalization. Within this evolving landscape, there is a discernible attraction among the youth towards voluntary relationships, where couples choose cohabitation as an alternative to conventional marriage. This paradigm shift is marked by a broader understanding of domestic cohabitation, the acknowledgment of pre-nuptial agreements, increased tolerance towards diverse sexual preferences, and similar considerations. For many, live-in relationships represent an appealing lifestyle choice—one akin to marriage but seemingly devoid of the complications and concerns intrinsic to matrimonial bonds. However, it is imperative to recognize that such arrangements demand heightened responsibility and an acute awareness of socio-legal implications. Contemporary society, alongside various institutions, has aligned with the judiciary in facilitating the legitimization of live-in relationships. This transition is indicative of a broader societal acceptance of Western cultural influences, ideas, and lifestyles.
A significant stride in this direction is evidenced by the Madhya Pradesh State Women’s Commission, which has advocated for the legal recognition of live-in unions to safeguard the rights of tribal women engaged in such relationships. Further contributing to the normalization of this concept, an NGO in Ahmedabad organized a distinctive event aimed at assisting single senior citizens in finding compatible companions within the realm of live-in relationships. Consequently, it is becoming apparent that live-in relationships are increasingly viewed as a viable alternative to conventional marriage rather than an outright replacement. In legal terms, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act of 2005 (PWDVA 2005) offers some safeguards for the rights of women in live-in relationships. Nevertheless, it is essential to acknowledge the existence of numerous gray areas within this evolving paradigm that warrant careful scrutiny and discourse. Addressing these complexities necessitates the enactment of a dedicated legal framework, one that underscores socio-cultural, legal, and secular dimensions. Such legislation would serve to navigate and resolve the intricate challenges inherent in live-in relationships, ensuring a comprehensive and equitable legal foundation for this evolving facet of contemporary social dynamics.
[1] 2001 SCC OnLine All 332
[2] (2010) 5 SCC 600
[3] (2006) 8 SCC 726
[4] Joseph Shine vs Union Of India on 27 September, 2018, WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 194 OF 2017
[5] (2008) 4 SCC 520
[6] 1994 AIR 133, 1994 SCC (1) 460
[7] (2010) 11 SCC 483 : AIR 2010 SC 2685
