Legal protection available in “Live-in”
relationship
Indian
society has always seen live-in relationship with scepticism, the thought of a
male and a female who are not married but are living together was against their
ideologies, but the judiciary had other interpretations. “Honourable Justice A.K.
Ganguly in Revansidappa V. Mallikarjun, the Indian judiciary has taken the
initiative to close the gap left by the lack of a live-in relationship specific
statute. Although it might be viewed as immoral by society, it is not at all
“criminal” in the eyes of law. The Indian judicial system seeks to provide
justice to those involved in live-in relationships, up until this point,
had no legal protection against abuse resulting from such relationships. The
judiciary neither explicitly supports nor forbids these kinds of
relationships.”
When an
Indian even thinks about coming into a live-in relationship, the first question
that pops up in mind is “Is Live-In relationship even legal in Indian society?”
Art.21 becomes the answer to such questions, which provides the right to life
and personal liberty, this article of Constitution of India serves as the
constitutional foundation for the legal recognition of live-in relationships,
but it is to be kept in mind that the existence of live-in relationships is
legalised but the legal protection is provided only after it passes certain
criteria. The Supreme Court laid down the criteria for “relationship in nature
of marriage” given below:
1.
They
must be competent and should be capable of giving a valid consent.
2.
They
should be of the age to get legally married.
3.
They
must be otherwise qualified to enter the marriage that is they are not brother
and sister.
4.
The
appearance of the relationship between the couple should be perceived as spouses
by the society.
After
reading the criteria provided by the Supreme Court one point becomes clear that
the legal refuge can only be demanded from the court if the relationship
between the two is in the nature of marriage and is also within the definition
provided under Sec.2(f) of the DV Act,2005.
Once a
live-in relationship falls under the criteria provided by the Supreme Court,
following are the legal protections provided by the law:
1.
MAINTENANCE
RIGHTS:
The
women in a live in relationship can seek maintenance not only under DV Act but
also under Sec.144 of BNSS.
The
Apex Court recognised the necessity of providing maintenance to an unfortunate
woman, who unwittingly enters into wedlock with a married man and thereby
upholding the objective of preventing vagrancy and destitution of the woman.
2.
PROPERTY
RIGHTS:
A
woman has a right to inherit property. In the case of “Vidhyadhari V. SukhranaBai”, the court ruled that a couple that has lived together for a respectable
period can inherit property from either partner. Live-in couples can inherit
each other’s property through wills or gifts. Furthermore, they can possess
their partner’s property either through a will or also through gifts but cannot
inherit their ancestral property automatically.
3.
RIGHT
OF CHILDREN:
In
the case of S.P.S Balasubramanyam V. Suruttayan, the Apex court for the first
time considered the question relating to the legitimacy of a child born from a live-in
relationship.
The
irony of a man and a woman who had been living together for a considerable
period of time that even the society presumes their relationship to be of
marriage finds it reasonable to approach the court to clear out the status of
the child that is to be born.
The
court ruled that “if a man and a woman are living under the same roof and
cohabiting together for some time, a presumption under Sec.114 of IEA (corresponds
to Sec.114 of BSA) is drawn that they live as husband and wife and the children
born to them will not be illegitimate.
Later
in Revanasiddappa V. Mallikarjun, the court held that “regardless of the legitimacy
of the relationship between parents, the child born out of that relationship must
be regarded separately from the relationship between its parents.
Property
rights of the child: A
child born out of a live in relationship does not have birthright to ancestral
property but does have the right to inherit the property bought by his/her
father or mother.
Although
there are no legal restrictions on live-in relationships, the court ruled that
they are not legally protected. Nonetheless, the legal situation of inheritance
rights is rather ambiguous and unpredictable due to the lack of statutory
framework governing live-in relationships.
CHALLENGES IN LIVE-IN
RELATIONSHIPS:
Live-in
relationship itself is a challenge in a society like India. A woman who has
entered in a relationship on the promise of marriage but has to go to the court
because she feels like her dignity as woman has been taken away by the man who
promised her future wedding but now goes back on his promise but her hopes are
crushed when she is not provided the relief because the court has held that the
ambit of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,2005, recognised an
unmarried couple in its ambit, but did not consider live-in relationships in
general. The court ruled that the Act provides protection to a woman in a
live-in relationship in the “nature of marriage” and cannot be availed by a woman
in an adulterous relationship.
Secondly,
there is no uniformity among the courts when the interpretation of a live-in
relationship and a relationship in the nature of marriage is in question, which
makes it harder to provide legal protection.
CONCLUSION:
Live-in relationship falls within the ambit of
a fundamental right provided under the constitution thereby it is a legal right
of the individual whether they want to or not enter into a live-in
relationship. Although the society has its own views but not everything that is
morally wrong is legally wrong thereby a legislation is necessary which
specifically tackles with such cases.
Author- Simranpreet Kaur
"The views expressed are personal. This article is intended for educational purposes and public discourse. Feedback and constructive criticism are welcome!"
Comments
Post a Comment