Live-In Relationships in

India: A Legal and Historical

Overview
Muskan Jain
Roll number 22047
 INTRODUCTION

Live-in relationships have recently been allowed to be publicly discussed in India,

although they are seen as an immoral and inappropriate connection. This type of
relationship is an arrangement between two unmarried individuals who live together
in a long-term relationship. The concept of cohabitation has been present in Western
countries for a while, however in India, it is still not widely accepted. Marriage is a
sacred union in Hindu law, with legal protections and obligations. Young people are
increasingly choosing to stay in live-in relationships instead of getting married.
Despite India's growth, traditional views still prevail and this kind of relationship is
still seen as taboo. Every individual has their own opinion on the matter.
HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPT
The Vedic Period saw the existence of premarital relationships,
the most common of which was the Gandharva marriage. This
type of union was similar to cohabitation in modern Western
society, where two people live together without the formality of
marriage. In the Medieval Period, sexual servitude was common
and premarital sex and live-in relationships were prevalent. In
modern India, the Maitri Karar system of friendship contracts
and Nataparatha in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh allow for
live-in relationships with some legal protection.
 LEGALITY OF LIVE IN RELATIONSHIPS IN INDIA
The concept of a live-in relationship is not yet covered by Indian law, but the courts
have taken the initiative by giving these kinds of partnerships some sort of validity. In
the past, the court frequently utilized the period of cohabitation to assume marriage.
For instance, the Privy Council codified a general rule that assumed a marriage if a
male and a female were residing together. In the case of Badri Prasad v. Dy. Director of
Consolidation, the Supreme Court assumed a marriage between a couple who had
been living together for 50 years. In 2000, the Supreme Court made a statement in
Superintendent of Nari Niketan, Agra v. Payal Sharma that a male and a female can
live together, even if they are not married. The court also granted a Succession
Certificate to the surviving partner's nominee in the Vidyadhari v. Sukhrana Bai case.
Furthermore, in S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal, the SC determined that live-in
relationships are legal and should meet certain conditions. Finally, the SC established
some rules for a "relationship in the nature of marriage" in Indra Sarma v. V.K.V.
Sarma, which included living together, combining resources, sharing house chores, and
socializing as a married couple.
 RECENT JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS

The Allahabad High Court ruled in Kaminidevi v. State of UP that parents have no right
to interfere with a couple living together of their own free will. The Punjab and Haryana
High Court subsequently rejected a protection plea from a cohabiting couple in Ujjwal
v. State of Haryana, citing that it would disturb the social fabric of society. However, in
Soniya v. State of Haryana, the same court granted protection to a cohabiting couple,
stating that such relationships cannot be considered illegal. The Rajasthan HC declared
in Rashika Khandal v. the State of Rajasthan that a live-in relationship between a
married and unmarried person cannot be tolerated. In Sanjay v. State of Haryana, the
court protected a couple living together and noted that society has not yet evolved to
accept such relationships. Lastly, in Ridhima v. UT of J&K, it was decided that the right
to exercise choice is an integral part of one's liberty and dignity.
ALIMONY AND MAINTENANCE IN LIVE IN RELATIONSHIP

The term "pallimony" refers to the relief provided in cohabiting relationships in

the United States. It was first coined during the "Marvin vs. Marvin" celebrity
divorce process in California. The Malimath Committee on Criminal Justice in
India suggested amending the CRPC to include women who have lived with a man
as his spouse for a considerable amount of time, giving them the right to seek
maintenance. The Prevention of Domestic Violence Act, 2005 defines a domestic
relationship as two persons who have lived together, related by consanguinity,
marriage, or family. The Supreme Court ruled that in a domestic partnership, a
divorced wife or live-in partner would have the right to redress under the Act. In
"Ajay Bhardwaj vs. Jyotsna," alimony was awarded to a woman living in a live-in
relationship in accordance with the PDV Act, 2005.
STATUS OF CHILD BORN OUT OF THIS RELATIONSHIP

The Supreme Court of India has stated that children born into live-in
relationships will be considered legitimate if their parents have shared a
residence and lived under one roof for a considerable period of time. According
to the Special Marriage Act and the Hindu Marriage Act, children born out of
null and voidable marriages are recognized as lawful or legitimate, but their
right of succession is limited to the parents' assets. To allow children born into
cohabiting couples to own their parents' independently acquired property, the
provisions of the Act have been implemented. Furthermore, children of
cohabiting couples are entitled to submit a support claim under Section 125 of
the Criminal Procedure Code. Lastly, the mother is considered the child's
natural guardian in matters of guardianship.
LEGALITY OF LIVE IN RELATIONSHIPS IN OTHER COUNTRIES

United Kingdom: Common Law Spouses are two people in a committed relationship who must
be older than 16, single or not in a civil union, and not related in any way. This law was
modified in 2019 to include couples of all genders.
USA: Consanguineous spouses are recognised as domestic partners in California, and can
access the same rights as married couples. Cohabitation between opposite sexes is illegal in
Michigan and Mississippi, but was repealed in Florida in 2016.
France: Cohabitation is a contract between two people of different genders, and must not be
bound by any other arrangement such as a marriage, sibling relationship, or family tree.
Couples must be at least 18 years old to enter a non-marital registered relationship and enjoy
some of the same rights as married couples, but maintenance is not guaranteed.
Canada: Cohabitation is recognised as a Common Law Marriage, and if it has been strong for
at least a year without a pause, the partners have the same legal rights as spouses.
 CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

Cohabitation is becoming increasingly popular in India, but is not yet legally

recognized. In other countries, such as the US, Scotland, and the Philippines, laws
do exist to protect the rights of cohabitating couples and their children. The
Indian judiciary is working towards bringing live-in relationships into
compliance with Indian law, but there is still a need for a legal framework to
address the specific rights and duties of these couples. Comparative studies of
other countries are needed to understand the socio-legal characteristics of
cohabitation. The Indian constitution must also recognize the right to individual
freedom, including the right to live with whomever one chooses. Laws tailored to
live-in relationships must be developed in order for them to be legally recognized.
Thankyou !