Although it is an age-old concept in India, it is being projected as a new modern-era concept. From the History of India, we get to learn that people of various clans used to stay together but their relationship could not get recognition now in the westernized and modern era, having rulings of the Supreme Court and High Courts, it is not only legal but also gives the right to man and woman associated with it. Indian Society has shown a great change in the living pattern amongst the working class in urban areas.

The Constitution of India gives fundamental rights to its citizens. Article 19 provides the right to freedom and speech and expression and reside and settle in any part of the country and Article 21 confers the right to life. Having a life partner with marriage or without marriage is also a right that falls under these articles of the constitution.

Taking strength from these provisions of the Constitution, the Supreme Court of India has passed a few landmark judgments in this area of life. In 2010 Supreme Court of India passed a judgment S. Khushboo Kanniammal wherein it held that live-in relationships come within the ambit of Article 21 and permitted such relationship of two major living together with their own free will and consent and such act cannot be considered illegal or unlawful.

In one another judgment of Indira Sarma Vs. VKV Sarma the Supreme Court held that a Live-in relationship or marriage-like relationship is neither a crime nor a sin though socially unacceptable. The Court also held that the decision of getting married or living together otherwise in a heterosexual relationship is intensely personal.

In the judgment of Tulsa & Ors. Vs. Durghatiya & Ors. Supreme Court gave legal status to a relationship who were living together for 50 years without marriage.

Taking serious note of the fact that the live-in relationship is a relationship that is similar to marriage, the court held in the case of Madan Mohan Singh that after a couple stays in a relationship for a long time it cannot be termed as “Walk-in and walk-out” relationship and a presumption of marriage is drawn there. Therefore, it carries most of the responsibilities, obligations and commitment such as it has in marriage.

In different situations, the court has also held that the Live-in relationship also carries other obligations and other laws which are applicable in marriage are also applicable in this kind of relationship also. In the case of Chanmuniya the court held that a female partner could claim maintenance under section 125 CRPC and in Velusamy’s case the Court held that the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act also apply.

Resources:-

(2013) 15 SCC 755        Indra Sarma Vs. VKV Sarma

(2011) 1 SCC 141          Chanmuniya Vs. Virendra Singh Kushwaha

(2010) 10 SCC 469        Velusamy Vs. D.Patchaiammal

(2010) 9 SCC 209          Madan Mohan Singh V. Rajni Kant

(2010) 5 SCC 600          S. Khusboo Vs. Kanniammal

(2008) 4 SCC 520           Tulsa & Ors. Vs. Durghatiya & ORs.

Constitution of India- Article 14 and 21

Share this News