Live-in Relationship
Essence of—A live-in relationship, in essence, denotes a cohabitation arrangement where two individuals choose to live together in a domestic setting, but in the absence of a formal marriage—In the Indian statutory laws, the concept of “live-in-relationships” remains undefined and lacks specific legal recognition—However, the Courts have time and again discussed the nature of such relationships keeping in the mind the constitutional guarantees of equality and personal liberty.
[Para 14]
Dimensions of live-in-relationship—No offence can be said to be committed if sexual relations are established between two adults willingly, irrespective of their marital status.
[Paras 15 & 16]
Distinction between ‘Live-in-Relationship’ and ‘Relationship in Nature of Marriage’—While “relationship in nature of marriage” is one where the parties hold themselves out to society as being akin to spouses for a significant period of time and are otherwise qualified to enter into a legal marriage—Whereas “live-in-relationship” may involve situations where two adults willingly live together without any formal commitment for getting married or where the commitment may be for a short-term arrangement only to assess compatibility with a partner and understand each other or any other reason, without having any intention to create a lifelong relationship or entering into a formal marriage—In many cases of live-in-relationships both the parties may be unmarried or either of them may be married or both may be married to their respective spouses.
[Para 17]
Indian Penal Code, 1860
Sections 376—Rape on false pretext of marriage—Live-in relationship agreement—Petition to quash FIR—Complainant legally married to another person, voluntarily entered into a live-in-relationship with petitioner, initially allegedly believing him to be unmarried, as stated in their agreement—However, upon discovering his marital status, she confronted him, and he allegedly promised to divorce his wife and marry her—Complainant continued the relationship, aware of both parties' marital status, indicating her consent to maintain the relationship despite legal obstacles to marriage without divorce—Further, the “live-in relationship agreement” did not mention a promise of marriage by the petitioner—Complainant was not legally divorced from her previous partner—Petitioner could not have entered into a legal marriage with her—There was no valid basis for the complainant to entertain the notion of promise of a marriage from the petitioner, as she, by virtue of her existing marriage, was ineligible to marry the present petitioner—FIR quashed.
[Para 41]
Pleadings
Use of derogatory and offensive language should be avoided while filing any pleadings in a Court of law, whether against a man, woman or any gender.
[Para 26]
Statutes
Interpretation—Statutory interpretations cannot be replaced by moral judgments—When the law contains a moral element, the Court is competent to decide it on the moral basis, however, in a purely legal way—It cannot substitute the statutory law and its ingredients by incorporating its own moral concerns and substituting criminality in a case where no statute makes it criminal but judge’s own sense of morality makes it so.
[Paras 34 & 35]