ABSTRACT: Live-in relationships are quite prevalent in India, as is an alternative form of marriage; it is the state or situation of two people living together in a long-term relationship without getting married. Although the easiest and least binding concept, it has various complexities and legal responsibilities. Recent legal developments have also attempted to regulate this fact by validating its legitimacy and laying down guidelines for maintenance, property, and child rights. However, live-in relationships are still debatable, and unresolved issues include the absence of official documentation, cultural sensitivities, property rights, wills and gifts, societal attitudes towards non-traditional relationships, and the inclusion of the LGBT community. These grey areas underline the fact that, despite legal recognition being on the cards, the discussion is far from complete.
The main focus of the article is to make the readers understand what a live-in relationship is. After then descriptive and analytic methodology was used to study the challenges and problems faced by the couples. Lastly, the paper argues that there is a need for secular and gender -sensitive laws for the couples opting to cohabit in a live in relationship.
KEYWORDS: live in relationship, property rights, maintenance, same-sex, child rights.
INTRODUCTION
A live-in relationship is referred to as an arrangement where two people live together without being married. Multiple countries have adopted and legalized this concept. The live-in relationship is no longer considered illegal, as per the Supreme Court. If a man and woman in love live together, it is part of their right to life. The National Commission for Women recommended to the Ministry of Women and Child Development on 30th June 2008 that the definition of ‘wife,’ as described in section 125 of Cr.P.C., must include women involved in a live-in relationship. The aim of the recommendation was to harmonize the provisions of law dealing with the protection of women from domestic violence and also to put a live-in couple’s relationship at par with that of a legally married couple. There was a Committee set up by the Supreme Court for this purpose, called the Justice Malimath Committee, which observed that “if a man and a woman are living together as husband and wife for a reasonably long period, the man shall be deemed to have married the woman.”
India is a country where marriage has been considered as a sacred bond since the Vedic era. The people see marriage as a religious sacrament. The couples who are married are allowed to live together legally and socially. There are a number of responsibilities for married couples, including children, spouse, their family, and marital home. The people in India consider the live in relationship as an abandonment of responsibilities. Hence, they dislike cohabitation.
While on the other hand, the youth of India are in favor of the live-in relationship. Couples go for a live in relationship as it free from responsibility and marital obligations. In India, youth opt for cohabitation as they want to focus on their career while living with their partners without any marital and legal obligations.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
The research methodology of this paper is heavily based on the understanding of the acts, statutes, books, news, and cases related to live-in couples in India and the analysis of this emerging aspect of societal structure. Subsequently, the research intends to put forward the problems and challenges faced by the couple through a descriptive and analytical approach. It then submits that, due to the latter’s faced challenges, there is a need for having a clear, secular, and gender-sensitive law for couples opting to live together in a live-in relationship.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE :
In her paper, Live In Relationships, Social Change and Indian Judiciary, Ishika Jain(2020), after doing the analysis of the laws and challenges of the live-in relationship, has concluded that there is an urgent need for the formation of legal statutes in order to validate the live-in relationships in India.
In her paper, Live–In Relationship in India: Laws and Challenges, Dr. Priya Sepaha(2021) has concluded that although there are rapid changes coming in society and gradually live-in relationships are being accepted by people, there are some grey areas that need to be looked at upon and a separate law should be made in order to solve the complexities that still exist in live-in relationships.
METHOD
This paper employs mixed methods to analyze the problems and challenges that are faced by live-in couples. It is a guiding document that steers policy and legal decisions about cohabitation in India, contributing to the current discourse on the legality of such unions.
WHAT DOES LIVE IN RELATIONSHIP MEAN?
A live-in relationship is referred to as a voluntary arrangement between two adults when they mutually agree to live together in a long-term relationship without being married. In the case of Alok Sharma vs. state, the Delhi High Court said that the nature of a live-in relationship is a walk-in and walk-out relationship. The court said that “which is renewed every day by the parties and can be terminated by either of the parties without the consent of the other party.”
The main idea behind couples choosing to live together without getting married is to see if they’re compatible by sharing a living space. There isn’t a specific legal definition for live-in relationships, so its exact meaning is still unclear. Live-in relationships are often considered an alternative to marriage. The concept of living together has gained acceptance and appreciation internationally, but in India, it’s still seen as socially unacceptable and immoral by the majority of the public. People view it as a way to have pre-marital and casual sex without any sense of responsibility or commitment. Couples who choose this path often face social disapproval. Live-in relationships aren’t defined or recognized under any law enacted by the Parliament, so their exact meaning remains uncertain, and their acceptance is still ambiguous. Law and society are two sides of the same coin and need to work together. When it comes to live-in relationships, as the concept gradually becomes more accepted in our society, courts have also recognized and protected the rights of individuals in such relationships. The courts have deemed this relationship legal, regardless of society’s opinion that it may be immoral.
LIVE IN RELATIONSHIP – NOT AN OFFENCE
In various judgments the Apex Court has stated that two adults voluntarily living together as husband and wife in a long-term relationship and have children they will be considered married by the court. In the Khusbhoo vs. Kanniammal & anr case, The Supreme Court said that the live-in relationship comes under the ambit of the right to life Article 21, and it further added that there was no law prohibiting the relation between the two adults or pre-marital sex. In Badri Prasad vs Dy. Director of Consolidation The Supreme Court said that live-in relationships are legal in India, but there are some limitations to it, such as age of marriage, consent, and soundness of mind. Hence, live-in relationships are not an offense in India.
THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, 2005
The Protection Of Women From Domestic Violence Act of 2005 grants rights and protection to females who are unmarried but cohabit with males without being their legal wives.
Section 2(f) of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 defines:
Domestic relationship means a relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point in time, lived together in a shared household, when they are related by consanguinity, marriage, or through a relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption, or are family members living together as a joint family.
The Act fails to provide an explicit explanation of a live-in relationship but is left to courts for interpretation. The interpretation of the phrase ‘ relationship in the nature of marriage ’ is done by the Courts with the help of the aforementioned provisions. This Act provides protection to the women who are in live in relationship from abuse of fraudulent marriages, bigamous relationships and so on.
ESSENTIAL FACTORS TO MAKE A LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP LEGAL.
The Apex Courts, in its judgment, has laid down certain essential factors for women which need to be fulfilled in order to be benefited under the PWDA, such as :
Duration of relationship:
It is imperative to recognize that the relationship cannot be presumed; there must be genuine sincerity and earnestness towards maintaining it to establish its legality. Instances such as spending merely a week together or engaging in a one-night stand cannot be categorized as constituting a domestic relationship. In cases where a live-in relationship endures for an extended period, it cannot be construed as a transient arrangement; instead, there is a presumption of marriage between the parties, as articulated in Madan Mohan Singh v. Rajni Kant. This judicial stance indicates a predisposition towards treating long-standing cohabitation akin to marriage rather than relegating it to the status of a novel concept like a live-in relationship.
Age:
The couple who is in a live-in relationship should be major according to Indian law. The legal age for marriage, according to Indian law, is 21 for males and 18 for females. Although in a recent judgment of Nandakumar vs. The State of Kerala, the Kerala High Court held that an adult couple could be in a live-in relationship even if the man’s age is below 21 years, which is the legal age for marriage.
Voluntary cohabitation of a couple
There should be free will and common intention of the couple for cohabitation. In order to demonstrate loyalty and commitment to their relationship, the couple needs to be supportive of each other and share financial arrangements and their respective responsibilities.
MAINTENANCE
The Malimath committee, which was set up in November 2000, gave a recommendation to amend sec 125 of CrPC, which is related to the maintenance rights of the ‘neglected and dependent wife, children and parents. The committee also recommended adding the women who are unmarried and cohabit with males in the definition of wife mentioned in 125 CrPC.
However, there are some criteria that are necessary for a woman to be benefited under the PWDA, such as, right age, consent, social status etc. But the relationship between the couples should be serious and not a walk-in and walk-out relationship. It should not be a relationship for one day or one week or a one-night stand.
In Chanmuniya v. Chanmuniya Kumar Singh Kushwaha, The Supreme Court turned down the judgment of the High Court, which declared that the appellant’s wife is not entitled to maintenance on the ground that only a legally married woman can claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC and awarded maintenance to the wife (appellant) pronouncing that provisions of Section 125 CrPC must be considered in the light of Section 26 of the PWDVA, 2005. The Supreme Court held that women in live-in relationships are equally entitled to all the claims and reliefs which are available to a legally wedded wife.
In Abhijit Bhikaseth Auti vs. State Maharashtra And others, the Court observed that it is not necessary for a woman to be married to claim maintenance under sec 125 CrPC. A woman in a live-in relationship can also claim maintenance.
ADULTERY
In Joseph Shine vs UOI, the Supreme Court on 27 September 20 unanimously ruled to repeal sec 497 of the Indian Penal Code. Hence, now live in a relationship, which was an offense earlier under sec 497 of IPC after this judgment, is now not considered to be an offense.
There are contentions that the section infringes two articles of the Constitution of India: Article 14, “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or nor deny any person equal protection of the laws within the territory of India,” and Article 15 “The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.”
LEGITIMACY OF THE CHILDREN BORN OUT OF LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP
In Tulsa v. Durghatiya, The Supreme Court remarked that the offspring of such relationships should not be given the label of illegitimacy. An important condition for this to happen is that people lived together with each other and maintained a cohabitation relationship for a required period so that their sincerity towards one another can be established. S.P.S. Balasubramanyam v. Suruttayan became the pioneer case to approve the legitimacy of children bred in live-in relations. The Supreme Court announces, “If a man and woman are living under the same roof and cohabiting for some years, there will be a presumption under Section 114 of the Evidence Act that they live as husband and wife and the children born to them will not be illegitimate.” Furthermore, the court also interpreted Article 39(f) of the Indian Constitution, which points its policies in such a direction that by enjoying such opportunities, children get a chance to develop themselves in a healthy way with freedom and dignity while childhood/ youth are protected against exploitation as well as moral/ material abandonment system.
INHERITANCE RIGHTS OF THE CHILDREN BORN IN A LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP
In 2008, the Supreme Court decided that a child born from a live-in relationship is entitled to the same inheritance rights as a legal heir. In the case of Lalita Toppo v. State of Jharkhand, it was additionally decided that if a couple cohabits and lives together, they are considered to have entered into a marriage or are married; in other words, when a woman and man share the same residence, live together for a period of time, are accepted as husband and wife by society, and can be termed as constituted a married couple.
Previously, the law laid down that children born out of cohabitation were illegitimate and were considered to have no rights. However, the Supreme Court decided in the Bharata Matha v. R. Vijya Renganathan case that children born out of a cohabitation have the status of legal offspring and are entitled to inherit a share in the property. Under the Hindu Succession Act 1956, a woman, married or unmarried, has the same rights of inheritance as men with respect to self-acquired and ancestral property. Later, in the Vidyadhari v. Sukhrana Bai case, the Supreme Court decided that a child born out of a live-in relationship is legitimate and has inheritance rights. The Court expanded the definition of an heir.
In 1995, in the Balasubramanyam v. Suruttayan case, the Supreme Court decided that a child born of a cohabitation is legitimate from the beginning. Furthermore, a presumption is to be made under ‘Section 114 of the Evidence Act that a man and woman are to be regarded as being married to each other if they have cohabitated and lived together for a long time as husband and wife. In other words, if a man and woman cohabit for a long duration and share the same residence, they are deemed married in the eyes of the law, and their offspring are considered legitimate and have a right to inherit the family property.
CHALLENGES OF LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP
Social Stigma: Unmarried couples living together often feel embarrassed, guilty or rejected because of what society thinks about them; their families might also disapprove while friends may question the sincerity of such relationships. The two may be subjected to a lot of pressure thereby affecting their relationship negatively.
Legal Recognition: Although some countries have started recognizing and protecting the rights of cohabiting partners, many jurisdictions still lack specific laws governing these unions thereby leaving such individuals vulnerable when it comes to matters property inheritance or even child custody in cases where one partner dies or they separate.
Financial Concerns: This type of love affair may hit the rocks due to differing earnings spending patterns and economic priorities. Making decisions about who will pay what bills, managing joint incomes or planning for tomorrow can only work through dialogue well founded on truth openness but not without clear agreements being put in place as failure to do so might stir further wrangles thereby stretching tension between them.
Communication and Commitment: There arises a point within this arrangement where people begin encroaching into each other’s private lives more than is required; this blurs lines, leading to misunderstanding conflicts. Effective communication becomes key at such times if any meaningful progress has to be made towards solving the problem; hence, there is need for both parties involved to always remain fully dedicated towards ensuring growth stability within their union despite different levels of commitment and various styles regarding how often one should communicate with their significant other could easily breed discontent instability.
Conflict Resolution: No matter how well-matched they might seem initially, working through differences tends to become increasingly complex within close quarters like those shared by live-in partners. Without effective conflict resolution chops or external support systems, minor dissensions can escalate into major issues. Learning to communicate constructively, concession, and seek professional help when demanded are essential for maintaining a healthy relationship.
LGBT couple: Generally, society is indifferent towards furnishing benefits to the LGBT community and unintentionally accepts their relationship. Indeed, any laws and judgments of live-in relationships, provisions, or discussions about LGBT couples are lacking. No matter if the Supreme Court has decriminalized consensual same-sex intercourse by scraping Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, India doesn’t honor the live-in relationship. Despite similar liberal interpretations by the honorable Courts in recent history, there’s still a lack of any connubial law for the LGBT community in the Indian frame.
Property rights related to anti-religion and the LGBT community: The major problem of live-in relationships is heritage and property rights. Presently, only under Hindu law are property rights given to children born out of a live-in relationship and that too of tone-acquired property and not ancestral property. Muslim law has its medium for the distribution of property, and it has, to date, not made any attempt to initiate any debate on time. There’s no provision for the LGBT community as well as pertaining to property rights. An LGBT couple can not gift their property or can not make a will for their live-in mate if they want. Without duly resolving similar forthcoming issues and codifying applicable laws, there may be room for cheating, fraud and it may give rise to felonious battles in families over property issues.
SUGGESTIONS
Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, is in need of dire amendment. There is no doubt about it: the definition of the word ‘wife’ should change, and that word should comprise women in a relationship similar to marriage.
Conversely, in Bharatha Matha & Anr. v. R. Vijaya Renganathan & Ors., it was noted that, while discussing live-in relationships, “the children born out of such relationship should not be treated as illegitimate in treating them as children for purposes of inheritance.” Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act should bring this amendment.
According to the case of Velusamy v. D. Patchhaiammal, live-in relationships are, hence held to be covered under the domestic relationships provided under Section 2(f) of the PWDVA,2005. To ensure that this protection is accessible to everyone, it is important to codify this provision explicitly.
To safeguard and explain the interests of partners in live-in relationships, fresh legislation on the same lines as the detailed rules in the case of Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma must be enacted by the Parliament, or at least the existing laws must be amended. The new legislation must clearly clarify the rights and protections available to the parties in a live-in relationship.
Conclusion
A live-in relationship is an association between two adults who cohabit without being married. The couples enter into these relationships in order to be free from the obligations and responsibilities that arise from marriage. Live-in relationships are not a very new concept, but They have been going on since 1990. Now, women have been given certain protections under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,2005, and under Section 125 of CrPC to claim maintenance by the Courts. There are also some challenges faced by the people who are in live relationships, so now it’s the need an hour to form legislation that validates live relationships.
ISHANI NARAYAN
DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY