Intern ation al J o u rna l of App lied Resea rch 20 15; 1(8): 74 -77

ISSN Print: 2394-7500

ISSN Online: 2394-5869
Impact Factor: 5.2
Live-in relationships: An ethical and a moral
IJAR 2015; 1(8): 74-77 dilemma?
www.allresearchjournal.com
Received: 22-05-2015
Accepted: 25-06-2015
Mohit chhibber, Aditya Singh
Mohit chhibber
B.A. LL.B (Hons), 8th Abstract
Semester, University school of Of late, live in relationships have emerged as a substitute for marriages. The number of people opting
law and legal studies, Guru for live in relationships seems to be increasing especially in the metros. The change is evident from the
Gobind Singh Indraprastha court rulings which have recognized these relationships and have ushered in provisions to protect
University, New Delhi.
women from undue harassment as these relations guarantee very little in terms of security. By its very
nature, these relationships stand a fair chance of success and failure. In cases of failure, these
Aditya Singh
B.A. LL.B (hons), 8th Semester, relationships have been accompanied by a disturbing trend of rape charges ruthlessly slapped by
University school of law and women against men, which results in arbitrary harassment of one sex by the other, in most of the cases.
legal studies, Guru Gobind This trend is continuously increasing and the courts have also expressed anguish over it. Though this
Singh Indraprastha trend is mostly seen in the urban areas but is considered a legal whirlpool once the relation falls out. In
University, New Delhi. this light, this paper attempts to analyze and examine the growing trend of rape cases in live in
relationships in India.
However, the moral and the ethical angle to the concept of a live-in relationship is a subjective one,
especially in a country like India, where a certain section of the society considers it to be a sin.
However, the young generation in metros has termed a live-in to be more democratic, offering them a
reprieve from the inherent shackles of marriage, citing the malaise of domestic violence as a major
argument against marriage. On the other hand, youngsters from smaller setups are still apprehensive
about the concept of a live-in relationship.
The researchers will look through the lens and evaluate the legal implications for an open, moral and
ethical interpretation.

Keywords: Live-in relationships, ethical, moral dilemma.

1. Introduction
Traditionally India is a country where marriage is considered as a sacrosanct institution
whose foundation is laid upon commitment and tolerance. With changing times the
dimensions of commitment have changed as a result people are exploring for alternatives to
marriage. Of late, live in relationships have emerged as substitutes of marriage. The number
of people opting for live in relationships is increasing notably in the metro cities.
This change is evident from the various court pronouncements which accord legal
recognition to these relationships and have laid down the provisions to ensure that
vulnerability of women is eliminated as these relations guarantee very little in terms of
security. By its very nature these relationships stands a very fair chance of success and
failure. In instances of failure, these relationships have been accompanied by a disturbing
trend of rape allegations ruthlessly slapped by women against men, which results in arbitrary
harassment of gender by the other, in majority of cases.
Unfortunately this trend is continuously increasing and courts have expressed anguish over
it. Though this trend is mostly seen in urban areas notwithstanding it is considered as a legal
whirlpool once the relationship goes out of place.
The moral and ethical angle to the concept live in relationship is a subjective one, especially
Correspondence: in a country like India. On one hand, a section of society is of the view that it will dilute the
Mohit Chhibberm
B.A. LL.B (Hons), 8th
sacred institution of marriage as it encourages a pre-marital sexual relationships, in fact they
Semester, University school of consider it to be a sin. On the other hand the liberal minds of the society considers it as a
law and legal studies, Guru progressive and forward looking concept which allows the younger generation to check their
Gobind Singh Indraprastha compatibility with their partners before entering permanent commitment through valid legal
University, New Delhi. marriage.
~ 74 ~ 
International Journal of Applied Research
 

2. Legality and Legal Implications of Live-In though they may not have undergone legal necessities of a
Relationships valid marriage, should be made liable to pay the women
Live in relationships is a voluntary arrangement whereby two maintenance if he deserts her. The man should not be
adults mutually agree to live together to conduct a long term allowed to benefit from the legal loopholes by enjoying the
relationship that resembles to a marriage [1]. “Live in advantages of a de facto marriage without undertaking the
relationships are a walk in walk out relationship. There are duties and obligations.” Court also wanted to interpret the
no strings attached to these relationships as the relationship is meaning of “wife” broadly under Section 125 of CrPc. for
free from any legal bond between the parties” [2]. This claim of maintenance, so that even women in live-in
relationship does not impose the typical responsibilities of a relationship can claim maintenance.40 The Court further
marriage. The founding notion behind opting for live in declared that a woman in a live-in relationship in entitled to
relationships is to test one’s compatibility with the other claim any relief mentioned under Protection of Women from
person before entering any sort of legal commitment. Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Live in relationships in a country like ours is often However, in the case of Velusamy v. D. Patchhaiammal [12]
considered a social taboo. Moreover none of the legislation the Supreme Court held that a women in a live in relationship
that deals with marriage or succession expressly extends is not entitled to maintenance under section 125 CrPC, unless
recognition to live in relationships. However, courts have she fulfils certain criteria, the Supreme court had observed
come forward to fill the void that was created in the absence that merely spending weekends together or a one night would
of any specific statute. Allahabad High Court in Payal not make it a domestic relationship. The bench of Justice
Katara v. Superintendent, Nari Niketan and Anr [3]. Held that Markandey Katju and T S Thakur laid down the parameters
live in relationship is not illegal. that a woman, who is not married, needs to fulfil, to get
The Court said that a man and a woman can live together as maintenance and these requirements are:
per their wish even without getting married. It further said a) They must be of legal age to marry
that it may be immoral for the society but is not illegal. The b) They must be otherwise qualified to enter into a legal
Supreme Court in Badri Prasad v. Deputy Director of marriage.
Consolidation [4] has upheld the validity of a fifty year live in c) They must be voluntarily cohabited and held themselves
relationship. Justice Krishna Iyer in this case remarked that out to the world as being akin to spouses for a
“a strong presumption lies in favour of wed lock where significant period of time [13].
partners have lived together for a long spell as husband and The Supreme Court observed, “in our opinion not all Live-in
wife as law. Law leans in favour of legitimacy and frowns relationships will amount to a relationship in the nature of
upon bastardy” [5]. marriage to get the benefit of the Protection of Women from
The Supreme Court of India has held by virtue of section 114 Domestic Violence Act, 2005”. To get such benefit the
of the Indian Evidence Act, the courts can raise a conditions mentioned above must be satisfied, and this has to
presumption of marriage that the partners in the live in be proved by evidence. “If a man has a ‘keep’ that he
relationships are married to each other [6]. In the case of S. P. maintains financially and uses mainly for sexual purpose
S. Balasubramanyum v. Surruttayan [7] the Apex court held and/or as a servant it would not, in our opinion, be a
that if a man and women are living under the same roof and relationship in the nature of marriage” [14]. The Apex court
cohabiting for number of year, there will be a presumption also observed, "No doubt the view we are taking would
under section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, that they live exclude many women who have had a Live-in relationship
as husband and wife and the children born to them will not from the benefit of the 2005 Act (Protection of Women from
be illegitimate. This is in fact in accordance with section 50 Domestic Violence Act), but then it is not for this court to
[8]
the Indian Evidence Act [9]. legislate or amend the law. Parliament has used the
It is a settled law that where a man and women cohabit as expression 'relationship in the nature of marriage' and not
husband and wife for a long term then the law shall presume 'Live-in relationship'. The court in the garb of interpretation
they were legally married, unless the contrary is proved. cannot change the language of the statute," the bench
Therefore, it can be inferred that the courts are keen towards observed [15].
recognising and protecting the rights of the individuals in a
live in relationship.  Legitimacy and the Rights of the children born out of
live in relationships
 Rights of Women in a live in relationship In the case of SPS Balasubramanium v. Sruttayan [16] the
The supreme court in Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma [10] has apex court observed that “if a man and a women are living
held that “relationship between an unmarried adult woman under the same roof and cohabiting for a number of years,
and an unmarried adult male who lived or, at any point of there will be a presumption under the Indian Evidence Act
time lived together in a shared household, will fall under the that they live as husband and wife and held that the child
definition of Section 2(f) of the Domestic Violence Act and born to them will not be illegitimate” [17].
in case, there is any domestic violence, the same will fall This was the benchmark case in which the Supreme Court
under Section 3 of the Domestic Violence Act and the upheld the legitimacy of the children born out of live in
aggrieved person can always seek reliefs provided under relationships and further put stress on the responsibility of
Chapter IV of the Domestic Violence Act”. It is clear from the state in directing its policy in concurrence with article
the above judgement that a woman in a live in relationship 39F [18] of the Constitution of India.
can seek relief by invoking the provisions of protection of In the case of Bharata Matha v. R. Vijaya Renganathan [19]
women from domestic violence act. the apex court clarified while deciding this case that a child
In the case of Chanmuniya v. Virendra Kumar Singh born out of live in relationship may inherit the property of his
Kushwaha [11] the apex court held that “in those cases where parents but he does not have any birthright in the Hindu
a man, who lived with a women for a long time and even undivided ancestral property.
~ 75 ~ 
International Journal of Applied Research
 

Notwithstanding the Supreme Court in Revanasiddappa v. by social custom and law carrying with it specific economic,
Mallikarjun [20] held that Section 16(3) of the Hindu sexual and child-care responsibilities.
Marriage Act, 1955 as amended, does not impose any In the dictionary of sociology [21], Duncan Mitchell defines
restriction on the property right to such children that are born marriage as ‘socially sanctioned sex relationship involving
out of illicit relationship/ void marriage except limiting it to two or more people of the opposite sex whose relationship is
the property of their parents. Therefore, such children will expected to endure beyond time required for gestation and
have a right to whatever becomes the property of their the birth of children.
parents whether self-acquired or ancestral. Tracing the roots in ancient India, marriage was considered
The Supreme Court in Dimple Gupta v. Rajiv Gupta [21] held necessary for the complete fulfilment of the purpose of life
that a child born out of an illicit relationship is entitled to of men and women without it was believed they could not
maintenance under section 125 CrPC while they are minors achieve ‘Moksha’ [22]
and after they attain majority where such child is unable to It was considered necessary for women due to the tradition,
maintain himself. culture and the complete economic dependence of women on
men.
3. Increase in the Trend of Rape Allegations In Case Of The four purposes of human existence according to hindu
Failure of Live In Relationships religion are Dharma, Artha, Kama and Moksha. Dharma
As the Delhi High Court in Alok Sharma v. State [22] means religious duty towards the society, Artha means
observed that live in relationships are walk in and walk out economic activity, Kama means the satisfaction of the sexual
relationships. We must understand that by the very essence desires and Moksha means salvation.
of live in relationships pose an even chance of failure or Thus, according to the hindu view of life, it is very necessary
success. Unfortunately, in case of failure of these for a man and a woman to marry, in order to achieve the four
relationships a dismaying trend is common these days where Purusharthas [23]- Dharma, Artha, Kama and Moksha, the
rape allegations are maliciously slapped by women against four ideals of life [24].
men, which results in harassment of one gender by the other, The traditional concept of a hindu marriage is that of a
in majority cases. Under this sensitive subject we aim to religious sacrament. It is a life-long commitment, the true
bring out the true picture as there is a need to scrap the purpose being a complete companionship in fighting the
gender biased law and adopt strict gender neutral laws. battle of life together. In India, marriages had more of a
The Supreme Court in one of its observations has expressed social origin and reason rather than individual origin and
anguish over this trend. purpose.
The Delhi High Court in Ravi Kumar v. State [23] observed On the other hand, the western ideology of marriage regards
that “the economic and social dynamics of the society are marriage as a personal matter concerned with love-making,
changing very fast. This can be witnessed by the increasing home making and living together but the Indian philosophy
number of live-in relationships which are justified by the views the concept of marriage as a religious sacrament and
young generation on the ground that the institution of as fulfilling obligations towards the family and the society
marriage is too burdensome as proven by the increasing while keeping it at a central position in the Hindu view of
divorce cases. Moreover, with the changing times these live- living.
in relationships have acquired a legal mandate and are slowly Hence, the concept of a live-in relationship, which is averse
becoming socially accepted. to the religious significance marriage holds in the hindu
Therefore, the need of the hour is that the boys and more mythology, faced resentment from the commoners living in
importantly girls have to be very careful and cautious before India.
taking such an important decision concerning their lives In India, live in relationships have been a taboo right since
before entering into the most sanctimonious relationship of the British raj. However, this trend is changing amongst
marriage or even to have live in relationship. One of the young couples in big cities like Bangalore, Mumbai, Delhi,
major reasons contributing increase in the rape cases is a etc. However, it cannot be denied that maintaining such
failure of live in relationship or any immature decision on the relationships in country’s rural areas would land you in
part of such young adults which more often end up in a trouble due to the deeply embedded concept of marriage as a
broken relationship but sometimes after indulging into religious sacrament in people’s mindsets.
physical relationship”. The parents continue to live in denial and cringe at the idea
Conclusively, we can see that courts have started to reflect of a live-in because for them, it hints at sex for pleasure
light on the other side of the issue which is least talked about instead of for procreation, which marriage implies. They see
and perhaps that’s the first stage towards recognition of the marriage as a religious sacrament, as having been
need of gender neutral laws so that the fabric of society is not conditioned like that since time immemorial.
damaged. Live-in relationships have always been considered as the
shrugging of taking up of a responsibility. Thereby leading
4. Live-In Relationships: An Ethical and a Moral people who are still conditioned to the mindset of previous
Dilemma? generations to resent the very concept of a live-in relation
The evolution of the concept of marriage is a difficult thing which they label as being western influenced and a destroyer
to trace because birth of a man is birth of marriage. It is a of our culture and social values.
practise that seems as old as the human race itself. Marriage However, with the surge in the process of globalisation and
and family are closely associated with the being of each the intrusion of the western culture in the Indian society has
other. led the younger generation to have a broad opinion and
In the Indian society, marriage is one of the deepest and most rationally figure out what they want.
complex web of human relations. It has to be understood that emotional bindings and
It is considered a unison of man and woman in a rite defined relationships cannot be pressed upon by the society to mould
~ 76 ~ 
International Journal of Applied Research
 

into a socially accepted unison unless and until the couple (accessed on 24/3/15 at 15:45hrs)
wants it to be. The freedom of choose what one wants 10. Criminal Appeal No. 2009 of 2013 (Arising out of
without the cringe of a moral and ethical question is the basic Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 4895 of 2012), MANU
essence of a democratic country like India. SC 1230 2013 (visited on 24/3/15 at 16:15 hrs).
11. Succession Rights in case of Live-in Relationships: An
5. Conclusion Analysis in the Indian context by Amartya Bag
Evaluating the origin of the concept of marriage as a (file:///C:/Users/ADMIN/Downloads/SSRN-
religious sacrament in ancient India, it can be said that the id2011751.pdf) visited on 24/3/15 at 18:20 hrs).
resentment of a live-in relationship by the people is not 12. (2010) 10 SCC 469.
arbitrary. They have been conditioned into such mentality by 13. See, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/SC-lays-
their ancestral generations. down-conditions-for-women-seeking-maintenance-in-
However, it has to be realized by the people that with the live-in-relationships/articleshow/6786239.cms (accessed
rapid increase in the influence of globalisation, the world has on 25/3/15 at 11:05hrs)
become a smaller place. 14. (2010) 10 SCC 469.
The intrusion of western culture into the Indian fabric is 15. supra
inevitable which will, undoubtedly modernise the way how 16. 1994 SCC (1) 460
the young generation thinks. They think rationally and 17. See,http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/sta
differently as compared to the previous generations. tus-of-children-born-in-live-in-relationships-1622-
The concept of analysing the level of compatibility before a 1.html (visited on 25/3/15 at 11:30 hrs)
couple formally ties the knot and gets into a socially more 18. Article 39(f) of the Indian Constitution lays down that
acceptable bond is practical in today’s times when the rate of children are given opportunities and facilities to develop
divorces and broken marriages is at an all-time high. in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and
A live-in relationship is often regarded a human rightist and dignity and that childhood and youth are protected
an individualistic approach. Despite being highly prevalent against exploitation and against moral and material
in majority of the western countries, the reality with regard to abandonment
the social fabric of India is drastically different. This societal 19. AIR 2010 SC 2685
web has been developed since the inception of the Hindu 20. 2011 (86) ALR 450
dharma. 21. AIR 2008 SC 239
This can be comprehended from the fact that in India, 22. Crl. M.C. No. 299/2009.
marriage continues to be the institution that is preferred to http://delhicourts.nic.in/Aug10/ALOK%20KUMAR%20
any other form of union. But it has to be realised and VS.%20STATE.pdf (visited on 25/3/15 at 13:45 hrs)
understood that adult unmarried couples who wish to live 23. 212 (2014) DLT 349
together under the same roof, should not be prohibited or 24. A dictionary of sociology by Duncan Mitchell, Aldine
victimised. This will harm the democratic setup of the Publishing Company, 1968.
country we all live in. 25. According to the Bhagwad Gita, the liberated Atman
The judiciary’s pro-active efforts to safeguard the interest of soul... an Atman soul that has finally liberated from the
such couples and protect them from the outburst of the cycle of birth and death gains entry into the abode of
primitive and conditioned mindset of the people is a God, the kingdom of god.
welcome step. 26. As propounded by Manu, The concept of Purushartha
indicates different values to be realized in human life
6. Reference through human efforts.
1. Live in relationships: recent development and challenges
by Dr. Kalpana V. Jawada (24/3/15 at 13:00 hrs)
2. Observations made by the Delhi High Court in Alok
Kumar v. State (Crl. M.C. No. 299/ 2009 Manu/ DE/
2069/ 2010)
3. AIR 2001 All 254. See,
http://lawwiseindia.com/2014/07/legality-live-
relationships-india/#more-344 (accessed on 24/3/15 at
14:20hrs).
4. 1978 AIR 1557, 1979 SCR (1) 1
5. Ibid 4, Refer to the judgement.
6. See, http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/a-
misinterpretation-&-un-called-construction-of-section-
114-of-evidence-act-live-in-relationship-721-1.html
(accessed on 15?3/15 at 15:30hrs)
7. 1992 Supp (2) SCC 304
8. Illustration (a) of this section provides that they were
usually received and treated by their friends as husband
and wife which is relevant in the presumption of
marriage.
9. See
http://www.academia.edu/1881774/Live_In_Relationshi
p_Impact_on_Marriage_and_Family_Institutions
~ 77 ~