Live-In Relationships Are Timepass, More Of Infatuation Without Sincerity: Allahabad HC
Live-in relationships have always been a controversial topic in India. While live-in relationships are not illegal in India, it is often looked at through the prism of morality and is considered immoral by a large section of society.
The Allahabad High Court recently observed that live-in relationships are more about infatuation for the opposite sex without any sincerity and they are often a timepass.
Why live-in relations are timepass?
The Allahabad HC made the observation while dismissing a petition filed by an inter-faith live-in couple seeking police protection.
"... in the span of two months in a tender age of 20-22 years, we cannot expect that the couple would be able to give serious thought over such types of temporary relationship. As mentioned above, it is more of infatuation against the opposite sex without any sincerity," a two-judge bench of Justices Rahul Chaturvedi and Mohd Azhar Husain Idrisi said.
The court further remarked that live-in relationships are "temporary and fragile" and turn into "timepass".
"Life is not a bed of roses. It examines every couple on the ground of hard and rough realities. Our experience shows that such types of relationships often result in timepass, temporary and fragile and, as such, we are avoiding giving any protection to the petitioner during the stage of the investigation," the bench said.
What is the case
The couple had filed a petition seeking police protection and to cancel an FIR filed against the man by the woman's aunt under Section 366 (kidnapping, abducting or inducing a woman to compel marriage) of the Indian Penal Code.
The aunt alleged that the man was a "road-Romeo and a vagabond" who had no future and would ruin her niece's life. She pointed out that the man was already named in an FIR under sections of the Uttar Pradesh Gangster Act.
Why HC refused to cancel FIR?
The woman, however, said she had a right to decide her future, citing her age (20). She further argued that her father had not registered a case in the matter.
After considering both sides, the court ruled that the arguments put forward by the petitioners were not adequate grounds for cancelling the FIR.
How SC has looked at live-in relationships?
It should be noted that the Supreme Court has in several instances ruled that live-in relationships are not illegal or immoral, and that two consenting adults had the right to live together without getting married.
In 2015 the SC had held that a long-term live-in relationship could be considered a valid marriage under certain circumstances. The court also held that women in live-in relationships are entitled to maintenance from their partners after separation.
What are the legal rights in live-in relationships?
In 2022, the SC had ruled that if a?man and woman cohabited for a long period, their son could not be denied the shares in the ancestral properties.
In 2005 the Parliament had passed the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, which provided legal protection to women who live with their partners in a relationship similar to marriage.
For more on the news, sports, and current affairs from around the world, please visit?Indiatimes News.
