Surprising That Minor Boy, Dependent On Father, Wants To Be In A Live-In Relationship: Allahabad HC
A 19-year-old girl and her live-in partner, a minor boy, sought to quash an FIR lodged against the boy under Section 366 IPC (abduction). The Allahabad High Court opined that there is no occasion or reason to quash the FIR.
The Allahabad High Court has refused to quash an FIR against a live-in couple and expressed surprise that a minor boy, dependent upon his father, wants to be in a live-in relationship.
Unsplash
Why HC refused to quash FIR
The plea was moved by a 19-year-old girl and her live-in partner, a minor boy, seeking to quash an FIR lodged against the boy under Section 366 IPC (abduction).
Taking note of the fact that the boy was dependent upon his father, the Allahabad HC opined that there is no occasion or reason to quash the FIR, Live Law reported.
What HC said on live-in relationships involving minors
It should be noted that in August, the Allahabad HC had held that a person below the age of 18 years cannot be in a live-in relationship, and this would be an act not only immoral but also illegal.
FREEPIK
How live-in relationships are 'just timepass'
In a related case, this week, the Allahabad HC had said live-in relationships are more about infatuation for the opposite sex without any sincerity, and they are often a 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," the court had said.
Unsplash
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 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.
It also said that until the couple decides to marry and name their relationship or show their sincerity towards each other, it "shuns and avoids expressing any opinion on such types of relationship".
For more on the news, sports, and current affairs from around the world, please visit Indiatimes News.
Bobins Abraham is the Assistant News Editor at Indiatimes. He has more than twelve years of experience in TV and digital journalism. An avid student of history and geopolitics, he is a conservationist and environmentalist at heart. He writes on environment, sustainability, human-animal conflict and more.
Read More
