Live-ins now acceptable in society, rules Supreme Court - Mail Today News
In a major psychological boost to couples in live-in relationships, the Opposing the petition seeking quashing of criminal defamation law. This form of living together is not recognized by Hindu Marriage Act, or any other statutory law. While the Popular Civil Lawyers in India. Live-in Relationship in India: Legitimacy Under Indian Law - Legal News India, Legal News World, Supreme Court, Supreme Court of India.
The conclusion drawn here israther absurd; to uphold a presumption of marriages in an arrangement which was in the first place made to avoid the presence of marital rights and duties is rather flawed. In a recent ruling by the Supreme Court, which can be considered to be a landmark judgement over the issue of live-in relationship, a bench headed by Justice KS Radhakrishnan said that the ambit of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,recognized an unmarried couple in its ambit, but did not consider live-in relationships in general.
While the step taken by the apex court in the said judgement is surely laudable the court missed out on two very essential aspects of the said judgement. It is thereby imperative to say that a woman must be protected from domestic violence whether she is in an adulterous relationship, a live-in relationship or in a marital relationship but at the same time it is not logical to confer a presumption of marriage in a relationship which was an escape from such duties and obligations at the first place.
Hence, it is necessary for the legislatures to bring the much necessary changes in the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, Also, now that the Supreme Court of the country has recognized the institution of live-in relationship formally it is necessary to make our legal conditions sustainable for such kind of relationships and hence it is necessary to legislate upon the issue of live-in relationship and provide logical and clear structure regarding the rights and duties of parties involved in such a relationship so as to not confuse such a relationship with marriage because the two are essentially different in nature and hence should be treated differently so as to protect the interest of both the parties in the relationship.
The taboo that used to haunt partners in live-in relationships has also started to fade away with society opening up about the idea of pre-marital sex and live-in relationships. This improved mindset is a result of freedom, privacy, profession, education and also globalisation. Moreover, for most of us — it is not an escape from responsibilities but a way to understand our partner and to check if at all we are compatibility.
Live-In Relationship: Here Are the Rights You Need to Know
A live-in relationship not only gives the couple an opportunity to know the partner without having to engage into a legally binding relationship but also excludes the chaos of family drama and lengthy court procedures in case the couple decides to break up. It involves continuous cohabitation between the partners without any responsibilities or obligations towards one another. There is no law tying them together, and consequently, either of the partners can walk out of the relationship, as and when they want.
How is live-in defined under Indian Law? The Supreme Court in Indra Sarma vs. Sarma defined live-in relationships in five distinct ways- A domestic cohabitation between an adult unmarried male and an adult unmarried female. This is the simplest kind of relationship. A domestic cohabitation between a married man and an adult unmarried woman entered mutually. A domestic cohabitation between an adult unmarried man and a married woman entered mutually.
These two are the most complex grey areas of acknowledging live-in relationship. Furthermore, the second type of relationship mentioned is adultery which is punishable under Indian Penal Code.
A domestic cohabitation between an unmarried adult female and a married male entered unknowingly is punishable under Indian Penal Code as well. A domestic cohabitation between two homosexual partners, which cannot lead to a marital relationship in India as no marital laws against homosexuality are defined yet.
In the instance case, Mariammal claim her brothe Muthu Reddiars property who died unmarried and intestate. Rengammal lived-in with Muthu and had children from that bond. After his death, she claimed inheritance. The trial Court did not accept her live-in claim. Her first appeal was dismissed. Subsequently, the Madras High Court held the judgment in favour of live-in partner. In the cases prior to independence like A Dinohamy v Blahamy the Privy Council laid down a broad rule postulating that, where a man and a woman are proved to have lived together as a man and wife, the law will presume, unless the contrary be clearly proved, that they were living together in consequence of a valid marriage and not in a state of concubinage.
After independence the first case that can be reviewed is Badri Prasad v Dy.
Director of Consolidation wherein the Supreme Court recognized live-in relationship as valid marriage, putting a stop to questions raised by authorities on the 50 years of life in relationship of a couple. In Payal Katara v. In Patel and others case the apex court observed that live- in —relation between two adult without formal marriage cnnot be construed as an offence.
Legality of a Live-in-Relationship
In Abhijit Bhikaseth Auti v. State of Maharashtra and Others on A woman living in relationship may also claim maintenance under Sec. The Maharashtra Government in oct. The Apex Court held that live-in relationship was permissible only between unmarried major persons of heterogeneous sex.
If a spouse is married, the man could be guilty of adultery punishable under section of the IPC. The same was relied on in S. With the husband surviving, Rangammal cannot invoke presumption of live-in. This judgment is not prohibitive law for live-in kids. Rights of Children Born out of Live-in Relation: Although Supreme Court of India has granted the legal status to Live-in Relationship,but what happens if one partner decides to walk out. Could the other partner be left homeless?
Will the children born into live-in relationship be recognized by the law? Will it empower women with the Right to Inheritance, Right to maintenance, and Right to demand Alimony? Will the law give the same standing status to live-in relationship as that of Marriage? Answers to these questions are changing on a regular basis.
Recently Supreme Court of India laid down that, child born out of live-in relationship possess a right to inherent the properties left behind by one of the partners. Delhi High Court case Arvind Yada Vs Renu Sharma, dated 19 January, wherein a 18 years old unmarried girl chose a path for herself to live with a married man.
The court protected their live-in relationship but alerted them that they will not be entitled to claim Maintenance and Alimony in case one of them later walks out of this wedlock. It is so because they do not qualify condition No.
They both must be unmarried. At the end of a relationship, both partners will be responsible for supporting children financially, regardless of which one of you the children live with.