“With the changing social norms of legitimacy in every society including ours what was illegitimate in the past may be legitimacy today.”
– Justice A.K. Ganguly[i]
In the modern era, marriage has become too much hectic in the youth and to sort out this problem they invented a shortcut named “ Living Relationship” where the man and woman live together as a husband and wife without marrying each other. Living relationship is different from the institution of marriage which is regarded as “sacred” in an Indian society. Living relationship is now a days more prevalent in the youth because they think that they are mature enough to choose their partner. According to them, It is a check or test which is to be done before the marriage that the partner to whom he or she wants to marry is capable enough of fulfilling marital obligation .
What is Live-in Relationship?
Live-in relationship is a relationship in which two persons decide to cohabit together for an indefinite period of time in a full-fledged relationship which include emotional and sexual intimate relationship.
Due to globalization, the society is influenced by the western thoughts where the people adopt very formal way of cohabitation. It changes the core philosophy of marriage in contrary to marriage, a living relationship is when two people live together under the same group but are not legally married to each other.
The court held the opinion that in circumstances where a man and woman had established that they were a couple and were living together, the law would pressure them to deny their union as a lawful marriage until the opposite could be established.[ii]
History of live-in Relationship
The concept of “live- in relationship might be new in this modern era. But actually, this concept of live-in relationships had been started by the first non-married couple in history, i.e., Adam and Eva. They were both unaware of the institution of marriage. In India, eight types of marriage were recognised, and out of those eight types, “Gandhrwa Vivah” is considered a “love marriage,” but there is no marriage in existence; it is just a simple commitment towards spouses, so we can say that it is a live-in relationship. So, the live-in relationship is not new in India.
In the Perception of Indian Law
Live-in relationships are not against the law in India, despite the absence of any regulations. Indian law recognises a live-in relationship between consenting adults as legitimate if all the conditions for marriage, including the legal age of marriage, consent, and soundness of mind, must be satisfied.
It was decided that although living together as husband and wife is neither illegal nor sinful, it is not generally accepted in the society. The decision to marry or select one’s own mate is entirely personal.[iii]
Indian Constitution
Our Indian constitution is partially rigid and flexible; it allows every person to do whatever they want within certain restrictions. There is no existence of uniform civil code in India, and most of the times personal laws govern the concept of marriage. Our legislature did not make any law regarding the live-in relationship, but our courts periodically discuss the constitutional legality of live-in relationship. Article 21 of Indian constitution protects the basic idea of right to life and personal liberty where people can choose their personal life partner without other’s interference.
In the landmark case of S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal ,the Supreme Court held that right to life and personal liberty includes the right to cohabit without interruption.
Indian Evidence Act, 1872
According to section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872, the court may presume, based on the existence of any fact that is likely to happen of human conduct, neutral event and private and public business depending on the fact of the particular species that if two person of opposite gender have lived together for a long period of time without having married, then there will be an presumption of marriage between them.
S.P.S. Balasubramanyam v. Suruttayan Andalli Padayachi & Ors. (1991)
In this case, the Supreme Court allowed presumptive marriage on Cohabitation under Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. In this case, Muthu Reddiars lived with her rengammal, but she died without marrying and bearing any children of that bond. After his death, Rengammanl claimed the estate. Earlier, Rengammal was married to Alagarasami (she was still alive), but they never lived together due to their unresolved marriage. The court of first instance did not accept the cohabitation claim. Her first complaint was dismissed. But then the Madras Supreme Court ruled in favour of her live in relation partner
The Code Of Criminal Procedure 1973
As per Malimat Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice System,2003 report there is a suggestion to widen the definition of word “wife” under Section 125 of the CRPC in the new amendment to include a woman who has been living with a man without having married like his wife for a significant period of time.
Chanmuniya v. Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha and another[iv]
the judgement of this leading case is As follows:
“We are of the opinion that a broad and expansive interpretation should be given to the term “wife” to include even those cases where a man and woman have been living together as husband and wife for a reasonably long period of time, and strict proof of marriage should not be a precondition for maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, to fulfil the true spirit and essence of the beneficial provision of maintenance under Section 125. We also believe that such an interpretation would be a just application of the principles enshrined in the Preamble to our Constitution, namely, social justice and upholding the dignity of the individual.”
The Supreme Court ruled that unless specific requirements are met, a woman in a live-in relationship is not qualified for maintenance under section 125 of CrPC. The Supreme Court also noted that a one-night stand or a few days together would not qualify as a relationship with the potentiality of marriage. “That a woman, even if not married, must fulfil the following four conditions to get maintenance,” said the panel of judges made up of Justices Markandey Katju and T S Thakur.[v].
(a) Couples must present themselves as husband and wife in the society.
(b) They must be of legal age to marry;
(c) They be legally entitled to marry provided unmarried;
(d) They must live together voluntarily for a significant period of time and be established in the world as related to the spouse ”
Hindu Law
Under Section 18 of the Hindu Maintenance and Adoption Act, it specifies “Hindu Wife” which doesn’t include a woman living with a man in a live-in relationship without having married, hence she is not entitled to any maintenance under this act.
In Ranjana Kejriwal vs Vinod Kumar Kejriwal, 1997 a living partner cannot claim a maintenance as a granting maintenance to an unmarried woman which is not a part and parcel of Section 18, which is specifically mentions Hindu wife.
Protection of Women from Domestic violence Act 2005
It is an enactment of central government, in section 2(f) of this act domestic relationship is defined as “a relationship between two persons who live or have at any point of time, live 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”.
In Velusamy versus D. Patchiammal, 2014 [vi]
Apex Court held that all live-in relationships are not included in the nature of marriage and also not all type of live-in relationships are governed as per section 2(f) of the Protection Of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
In Nandakumar and another v. The state of Kerala[vii], the court emphasized that “ live-in relationship is now recognized by the Legislature itself, which has found its place under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ”.
In The Purview of Foreign Law
In the eye of law, live-in relationship is not a crime in India but no particular provision is given by the Indian legislature. The concept of Live in relationship is very sensitive in India and it is not acceptable in the society but our courts regularly support this concept. Now let us know about the status of other countries with regard to live-in relationship.
American Law
Prior to 1970, cohabitation was against the law in the United States, but it later became common law, provided certain conditions were met. Several consensual sex laws, which later became to be known as “prenuptial agreements” and living together agreements were a part of American legal history at that point of time. Later, the nation institutionalised cohabitation by granting cohabiting individuals nearly identical rights and obligations to the married couples, emulating Sweden and Denmark. Those who cohabit are not considered to be parents under the law.
British Law
The Civil Partnership Act, 2004 in the United Kingdom mostly regulates live-in partnerships. Though the term “common law spouses” is frequently used to describe a man and woman who are in a committed relationship, it is not entirely accurate under English and Wales law. According to government, live-in partners should owe one another in order to merit the name. Unmarried couples do not have any guarantees about ownership of each other’s property in the event of a relationship breakup, according to a 2010 letter from the Home Affairs Section to the House of Commons. When a cohabiting couple separates, the courts cannot divide the property and disregard strict legal ownership as they may in a divorce. Unmarried couples are not automatically entitled to inherit their deceased partner’s assets. For taxation purposes, cohabiting couples are regarded as separate persons.
Marriage vs. Live-in Relationship
Marriage has always been a sacred institution in India which is considered as the eternal bond . According to the law, marriage is a contract between a man and a woman in which the parties undertake to live together and support each other. In India, marriage has been considered a sacred bond since Vedic period. Marriage ceremony in India takes place according to the personal laws to which the party belongs, or the provisions of the Special Marriage Act. According to the law, marriage is a contract between a husband and wife where the parties undertake to live together and support each other. The concept of marriage has evolved over time. Marriage is usually defined as one of the basic civil rights after the official ceremony.
It has a legal meaning and involves a number of duties and responsibilities, such as bonds, issues related to the inheritance of property, debt collection, etc. Marriage; thus, legal prerequisites include custom, discovery, selectivity, and anything legal results that flow from that relationship. Unlike many other countries, cohabitation is still not socially accepted norm in India. However, due to continuous development of society and the extensive complexity of marriage, cohabitation evolves to create a lasting marital relationship.
Live in relationship is a concept where a couple live together without marriage. It morally and socially unacceptable from a social point of view .
CONCLUSION
Both live-in relationships and marriage are interpersonal relationships that individuals engage in, each with its own dynamics, benefits, and considerations.
Live-in relationships offer individuals the opportunity to cohabit without the formalities or legal bindings of marriage. They provide a level of freedom, allowing partners to assess compatibility, shared living, and commitment before making a more permanent decision. However, legal protections and societal recognition may be limited in a live-in relationship compared to marriage.
On the other hand, marriage is a legally recognized union that typically involves a formal ceremony and legal commitments. It provides a strong social and legal framework, offering benefits such as shared responsibilities, financial security, societal recognition, and legal rights, including inheritance, healthcare decisions, and spousal support.
The choice between a live-in relationship and marriage often depends on personal preferences, cultural beliefs, individual values, and the nature of the relationship. Some prioritize the flexibility and autonomy of a live-in relationship, while others value the security and commitment offered by marriage.
In conclusion, both live-in relationships and marriage have their own merits and considerations. Ultimately, the decision rests on the preferences, values, and circumstances of the individuals involved, and both can be valid and fulfilling forms of commitment based on mutual understanding and respect between partners.
[i][i] Revanasiddappa v. Mallikarjun, (2011) 11 SCC 1
[ii] Mohabbat Ali Khan V. Muhammed Ibrahim Khan (1929) 31 BOMLR 846
[iii] In Indra Sarma vs V.K.V.Sarma on 26 November, 2013
[iv] Chanmuniya v. Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha and another, 2010
[v] D.Velusamy vs D.Patchaiamma, 2010
[vi] Velusamy versus D. Patchiammal, 2014
[vii] Nandakumar and another v. The state of Kerala , 2018
Author: Vaibhav Shukla
Juris Centre 