RIGHTS OF UNMARRIED COUPLE IN INDIA

INTRODUCTION

India is steadily progressing toward modernity. People’s perspectives and attitudes toward society are gradually shifting. Despite this, many unmarried couples face harassment. Despite the fact that our culture has a touch of modernity but dusty old mentality still exists. However, in India, there is always a problem with unmarried couples, and individuals continue to take opposing positions without fully understanding the rights granted to them by the government.

Legal status of live -in – relationship in India

Most Western countries have a larger view of the concept of a pair in a relationship, as seen by the legal recognition of prenuptial agreements, civil and domestic unions of couples, and other similar practises. In India, though, things are different.

In numerous decisions, the Supreme Court has stated that if a man and woman “lived like husband and wife” in a long-term relationship and even had children, the judiciary would conclude that the two were married and that the same laws would apply.

?In the case of Soniya and Anr?vs State of Haryana and Ors (2018)?,the Supreme Court said ‘ The Article 21 of the constitution of India provides its citizens with the Right to life and personal liberty. Once an individual who is major?has chosen their partner, it is not for any other person, even their family members, to object and cause hindrance to their peaceful life’.

In another case, the Supreme Court held that a man and a woman living together in alive in relationship is a component of their right to life under Article 21 and not a “crime.” As a result, in India, live-in relationships are legal.

Can unmarried couples stay in hotels in India

Yes, unmarried couples are permitted to stay in the same hotel room. There is no rule prohibiting an unmarried couple from staying in a hotel in the country. The only stipulation is that they must be at least 18 years old and provide evidence of age. The hotel owners/managers, however, reserve the right to refuse a couple’s check-in. Within the confines of the closed grounds, the pair has the freedom to act however they wish.

In 2019, when the Coimbatore district administration closed an apartment after discovering that it was occupied by an unmarried couple, the Madras High Court intervened, clarifying that “apparently, there were no laws or regulations forbidding unmarried persons of opposite sex from occupying hotel rooms as guests, while live in relationship of two adults is not deemend to be an offence, terming the occupation of hotel room by an unmarried couple will not be a criminal offence.”

Legitimacy and inheritance of children born out of live-in relationships

Due to their valid and delightful property rights, children born to live in partners are considered genuine and enjoyable property rights. Under section 16 of the Hindu marriage statute, they have the right to their parents’ self-acquired property. The Supreme Court upheld the legality of children born from live-in relationships in which the couples have been cohabiting for a long time.

In the case of Tulsa & Ors vs Durghatiya & Ors (2008), the supreme court stated that “a child born out of a live in relationship could not be considered in legitimate if their parents live together under one roof for a long time. It must not be a ‘ walk in’ and ‘walk out’ relationship. Section 16 of the Hindu marriage act 1955 and section 26 of the special marriage act 1954 bestow the child’s legitimacy who is born out of null and World marriage or wear a degree of nullity is granted in respect of voidable marriage” .

Maintenance Rights of children

Even though the live-in partners are no longer together, the parents are nonetheless responsible for the children’s upkeep. If they are subject to Hindu law, the father is expected to pay for the maintenance, however if they are subject to Muslim law, the father is not needed to fulfil any such responsibility. Children, on the other hand, can always seek support under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, even if their personal law does not favour them.

In the case of Rajeeve vs Sarasamma & Ors (2021) , the Supreme Court observed that “the?parties in a live in relationship that have live together for a very long period of time could be bought within the purview of law pertaining to maintenance and can be considered Husband and Wife for a limited purpose”.

Protection against exploitation of women and children in live in relationships

The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act of 2005 has been lauded as the first legal act to acknowledge the existence of adult heterosexual relationships outside of marriage. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act of 2005 granted rights and protection to women who are not legally married but live in a relationship similar to marriage with an unmarried male individual. Therefore Supreme Court has allowed live-in relationships to be covered within the scope of the statute in a couple of situations.

In the case of S Khushboo vs Kanmiammal & Anr (2010), the Supreme Court state that, “it seems to us that in the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence 2005, parliament has taken notice of a new – social phenomenon which is emerged in our country known as live in relationship”.

Consensual sex among adults in privacy does not harm public decency of morality

Unmarried couples cannot be harassed by the police for having consenting sex in private places. Article 21 of India’s constitution guarantees us the right to privacy, and sexual autonomy is a key component of that freedom. Certain essential rights are guaranteed to all of us by the constitution. The Supreme Court stated in the Puttaswamy decision of 2017 that “sexual autonomy is an inherent component of the right to privacy under Article 21 of the constitution.” The Supreme Court declared in the Navtej Johar Judgement of 2018 that “an individual has sovereignty over his or her body and can willingly yield autonomy to another individual and their choice. Adults having consensual sexual intercourse in private space has no bearing on public decency or morality”.

Conclusion

Our culture is changing, and courts must adapt to the changing circumstances as well. Live-in partnerships have been recognised by Indian courts, but there is still a long way to go. A live-in relationship is not considered a crime, and there is no law prohibiting this type of relationship as of yet. The parliament needed to pass a new law to deal with situations of living relationships since different high courts have taken opposing positions on the same topics. Change is necessary for society, and people should no longer consider living in a partnership to be morally wrong.

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?