The Delhi High Court has ruled that while society may frown upon a live-in relationship between two married adults, it is not considered a legal offence.

In a ruling issued on September 13, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma emphasized the distinction between societal moral judgment and legal criminal offences. Justice Sharma pointed out that while certain segments of society may strongly disapprove of a live-in relationship between two married individuals, there are also many who do not share the same perspective.

The Court clarified that a live-in relationship between two consenting married adults, even if they are married to different partners, has not been declared a criminal offence through legislation. The Court emphasized that the legal system does not seek to enforce moral standards and that judgments should not attempt to dictate or preach legal morality in such matters.

Therefore, the Court emphasized, that judges while they may have personal opinions about such relationships, cannot assign criminality to such actions based on their subjective interpretations of morality.

The single-judge emphasized that it would be a risky proposition to label acts as criminal when there is no legislation against them solely based on subjective notions of morality. The judge further noted that judges, as individuals, may hold diverse moral perspectives, and these personal beliefs should not be imposed upon any party in a legal context.

The Court made a significant ruling stating that when a woman is legally ineligible to marry someone due to her existing marriage to another person, she cannot accuse the other party of rape by asserting that she was deceived into a sexual relationship under the false pretext of marriage.

The court expressed the opinion that individual adults have the freedom to make their own decisions, even if those decisions deviate from societal norms or expectations. However, the court noted that in such cases, individuals must be prepared to accept the possible consequences that may arise from such relationships.

The court made these observations while addressing a plea filed by a man who was seeking the dismissal of a First Information Report (FIR) filed against him on charges of rape. The allegations were made by a woman who claimed that he engaged in sexual relations with her under false promises of marriage. The two individuals involved were said to be in a live-in relationship, and both were already married.

Regarding the situation where both parties were already married to other individuals but engaged in a live-in relationship, the Court asserted that an action may be deemed socially unacceptable but that does not necessarily make it a criminal offence.

The Court held the view that women have the capacity to make choices as equals, and these choices should be honoured, regardless of the traditional notion that women bear the responsibility for upholding societal morality.

In response to the man's request to dismiss the FIR, the Court ruled that if a woman is legally unable to marry another individual due to her existing marriage with someone else, she cannot assert that she was manipulated into a sexual relationship under the guise of marriage.

In the specific case at hand, it was clear that the petitioner, the man, could not have legally married the complainant. Therefore, there was no valid reason for the complainant to believe in the promise of marriage from him, especially considering her existing marriage, which made her ineligible to enter into another marriage.

Consequently, the Court granted the man's request and dismissed the First Information Report (FIR).

Case: S Rajadurai v State (NCT) of Delhi & Anr, W.P.(CRL) 208/2023 & CRL.M.A. 5217/2023.