Introduction
In Indian society, live-in relationships, sometimes called cohabitation, have become increasingly prevalent in recent years. It is an arrangement in which two people, usually in a romantic or intimate union, decide to live together without getting married or having their status as spouses officially recognized by the law. In simple words, it is a practice where a man and a woman live together without tying a knot. In a live-in relationship, partners share a domestic and often a sexual relationship, while maintaining separate legal and financial statuses. It is characterized by a degree of commitment, mutual understanding, and sharing of living space, similar to a married couple, but without the formal legal obligations and rights associated with marriage. This modern relationship dynamic challenges traditional notions of marriage and raises questions about the legal and property rights of the individuals involved.
History
The concept of live-in relationships was not uncommon in ancient India as historical scriptures and texts highlight the practice of ‘Gandharva Vivaha’. It was a form of marriage where couples chose to live together without societal approval or any formal ritual. It was prevalent during the Vedic period and continued through the medieval era. In the British colonial era, various laws and regulations discouraged relationships outside marriage or cohabitation. The colonial-era criminal law, Indian Penal Code, 1860 criminalized adultery affecting the acceptance of live-in relationships in India. After independence, India underwent significant social and cultural changes including their viewpoint regarding live-in relationships. Currently, this practice is common among the younger generation as it relieves them of responsibility.
Legal Recognition of Live-in Relationships
India does not have specific legislation that governs live-in relationships or provides a comprehensive legal framework for the rights and obligations of partners. India lacks a distinct legal framework that addresses live-in relationships or outlines the rights and responsibilities of partners. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court of India has recognized and accepted live-in partnerships as a valid form of companionship in several landmark judgments. Let us discuss different case laws that play a significant role in adopting live-in relationships in India and providing rights to persons involved in such relationships.
For the first time, the validity of live-in relationships was upheld in the Supreme Court, Badri Prasad vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation on August 01, 1978. In this case, the bench observed that if a man and a woman lived together for a long time, such a relationship is presumed to be a marriage.
In the landmark judgment, S. Khushboo vs. Kanniammal & Anr. (April 28, 2010), the Supreme Court held that live-in relationships were not illegal as well as there’s no such law that prohibits live-in relationships or pre-marital sex. It also highlighted that living together is a right to life as per Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
In the Dhannulal and Others vs. Ganeshram and Another case (April 08, 2015), the top court stated that after the death of a woman’s live-in partner, she has the right to inherit property. In this case, the family members of the deceased contended that the woman should not be entitled to inherit property although she was living with the deceased for 20 years because she was not married to the deceased. The bench delivered the judgment considering its earlier decisions that if a man and a woman have been cohabiting for a long time, such a relationship is presumed to be a marriage by the court. Also, the SC in the January 22, 2008, judgment, Vidyadhari & Ors. vs. Sukhrana Bai & Ors., had held that the woman living with a man in a live-in relationship has the right to inherit her partner’s property.
In the D. Velusamy vs. D. Patchaiammal case (October 21, 2010), the Supreme Court laid down certain criteria to define whether a relationship between two unmarried adults qualifies as a ‘relationship in the nature of marriage’ and is within the provisions of Section 2(f) of the Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. This provision of the Act states that “domestic relationship means a relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point of 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 criteria illustrated by the SC bench in the afore-mentioned judgment is as follows: “In our opinion, a ‘relationship in the nature of marriage’ is akin to a common law marriage. Common law marriages require that although not being formally married:-
- The couple must hold themselves out to society as being akin to spouses.
- They must be of legal age to marry.
- They must be otherwise qualified to enter into a legal marriage, including being unmarried.
- They must have voluntarily cohabited and held themselves out to the world as being akin to spouses for a significant period of time.”
In the landmark verdict of the top court in Bharatha Matha & Anr. vs. R. Vijaya Renganathan & Ors. case (May 17, 2010), the children born from live-in relationships were given the right to inherit a portion of their parent’s property. The bench said, “a child born of void or voidable marriage is not entitled to claim inheritance in ancestral coparcenary property but is entitled only to claim share in self-acquired properties, if any.” The live-in relationships also have a right to maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. Section 125 of the CrPC deals with ‘order for maintenance of wives, children and parents’. The top court in the Indra Sarma vs. V. K. V. Sarma (November 26, 2013) and Lalita Toppo vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr. (October 30, 2018) also played an important role in defining live-in relationships in India. In the recent judgment of the Lalita Toppo case, a woman in a live-in relationship for a significant period is entitled to claim maintenance under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. This decision acknowledged the rights of women in live-in relationships and provided them with legal protection and financial support. Apart from this, there are certain judgments delivered by the High Courts that recognize the right to inherit properties in case of live-in relationships. These judgments have extended the scope of property rights for partners in live-in relationships, ensuring some level of financial security and stability.
Conclusion
Live-in relationships in India are gradually gaining acceptance and legal recognition. While the absence of specific legislation poses challenges to the establishment of comprehensive property rights, the judiciary has played a crucial role in safeguarding the rights of partners in live-in relationships. Individuals in such relationships should maintain records of financial contributions and seek legal advice to protect their interests. As societal norms continue to evolve, lawmakers must consider enacting legislation that provides clarity and certainty in matters of property rights for partners in live-in relationships. This would not only ensure justice and fairness but also reflect the changing dynamics of modern relationships in India.