Imagine a knock on the door at midnight, not because you are charged with sedition or tax evasion but because you are in a live-in relationship and haven’t registered it. This could happen to you in the Indian state of Uttarakhand. Under Section 378 of the Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code, those who are in a live-in relationship are required to register it with the authorities. The Code has received the president’s assent and the state government says it will implement it as soon as possible.
Two questions arise: one about the content of the law and one about how it will be enforced. One of the substantive law questions is that of privacy and the requirement to register a live-in. This is especially relevant after the Puttaswamy opinion of the Supreme Court of India, which held privacy was a constituent of the fundamental right to life and liberty. Even if it is held that the state has the right to demand this information from citizens, the Code falters when it comes to basic procedural requirements.
The Code seems to ignore a foundational precept of administrative law — the rule of law. Rule of law is the opposite of the rule of the prince, meaning citizens should be governed by properly formulated laws rather than the whims of officials. In its most basic form, it stipulates that a person can only be held liable for actions which are a distinct breach of law and that public officials will always be guided by powers granted to them by law.
Legal philosopher Joseph Raz, a proponent of legal positivism — which does not see a necessary link between law and morality — argues that a citizen must be able to plan their lives and to do so they must know the sphere of freedom. For that, it is imperative to understand the coercive limits of state action in a particular circumstance.
Background
In India, the concept of Live-In Relationships has become increasingly common in recent years and the laws regarding live-in relationships in India are still evolving. Unlike in some other countries, live-in relationships are not recognized as a legal union under any law in India. However, the Supreme Court of India has held that living together as partners without getting married is not illegal or a criminal offense. Partners in a live-in relationship do not have the same legal rights as married couples, but they are entitled to some legal protection under certain laws. In this context, it is important to understand the legal framework governing live-in relationships in India to protect the rights of individuals in such relationships. In terms of legal rights, partners in a live-in relationship do not have the same rights as married couples. For example, partners in a live-in relationship cannot inherit each other’s property, and they do not have any right to maintenance in case of a separation. However, if a child is born out of a live-in relationship, the child has the same legal rights as a child born to a married couple. A live-in relationship is defined in section 3(4)(b) of the Code as one where a man and a woman cohabit in a shared household through a relationship “in the nature of a marriage”. The reason marriage is used as a marker is very simple. To be married, one must take an objective step — the wedding. This step, however it may look in its ritualistic form across cultures, has the same meaning for everyone and is understood as such.
In 2005, the Indian Parliament passed the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, which provided legal protection to women who live with their partners in a relationship similar to marriage. The Act recognized the need to protect women who face domestic violence in live-in relationships and made provisions for them to seek legal remedies. The first time the legal system in India recognized live-in relationships was in 2010, when the Supreme Court of India passed a landmark judgment in the case of “Khushboo vs Kanniammal”. In this case, the court held that live-in relationships were not illegal or immoral, and that two consenting adults had the right to live together without getting married. In 2015, the Supreme Court of India made a landmark judgment in the case of D. Velusamy vs. D. Patchaiammal, where it recognized that a long-term live-in relationship could be considered a valid marriage under certain circumstances. The court also held that women in live-in relationships are entitled to maintenance from their partners after separation.
Challenges faced by the Couples in the Live-In Relationships in India
Although the concept of unmarried couples living together in India is becoming popular, especially in cosmopolitan cities, it’s not happening fast enough. Several sections of society still look at live-in relationships with scorn. In most cases, when you break it to your parents, their first reaction would be, “What is a live-in relationship?” Most Indians, especially the older generations, still look down upon live-in relationships as taboo. It is highly likely that your parents themselves fall into this category. For them, staying together is valid only after marriage and live-in doesn’t fit their perceptions. The problems being faced by the couples are assault, taunting, harassing, considering them criminals, and liable for spreading delinquency among youngsters for it. The serious difficulties being faced by the women as if the relationship gets to ended and there is no hope of reunion in such conditions it would be strenuous for her to once again be fixed in a knot with someone else and this typical minded background might be the scenario invent where no man is ready to marry her because of her previous reminiscence. Apart from this, there are many times when financial burdens are avail. Even though the live-in-relationship is not committed to papers but to love and loyalty for each other.
Uniform Civil Code and Live-In Relationship
The concept of marriage and cohabitation is increasingly being understood by the Indian court from a traditional perspective to modern existence in a changing society. There is an ominous shadow that hangs over the status of children born through such relationships. There are innumerable judicial cases where the law is inferred. Based on years of cohabitation, judges frequently assumed that long-term partners had recently been married.The Uttarakhand government introduced the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) Bill on 6 February, 2024 in the Legislative Assembly. Tabled by Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami, the legislation seeks to “govern and regulate the laws related to marriage and divorce, successions, live-in relationships, and matters related thereto.” Uttarakhand’s Uniform Civil Code has made it mandatory for live-in couples to register themselves with the district officials, with parental consent for those below 21 years of age. According to the UCC Bill, the registration must be done within one month of the partners living together, and the failure to do so, will impose a jail term of at least three to six months, or a fine of 25,000 on the individuals, or both.Unlike earlier times, the Court now views live-in relationships differently, contending that they are not necessarily unlawful. Cohabitation is not prohibited, according to decisions made by the Supreme Court of Allahabad in instances like Payal Sharma v. Superintendent, Nari Niketan, and others. Additionally, it stated that while this may be morally wrong in society, it is not against the law. Morality and laws is not the same thing. The Supreme Court declared in the case of Patel and others that cohabitation between two adults who are not legally married cannot be considered a crime. It was also emphasised that there is no law presuming that cohabiting is prohibited.
Way Ahead
Everyone has the right to freely select their life partners with whom to start a family through marriage. Despite the difficulties, the goal of marriage is to establish a sense of connectedness. Although marriage does not ensure lifelong bliss, it does offer safety and legal status in society. An issue of privacy and individual rights, cohabitation arrangements should be changed. In the absence of regulation, Indian judicial wisdom has greatly advanced knowledge of cohabitation-related issues and upheld a fair stance. While it is true that society must adapt throughout time, moral standards and cultural norms shouldn’t be sacrificed in the name of progress. Consequently, there is a pressing need to teach the younger generation about the genuine meaning of marriage. Therefore, it is necessary to educate the present generation about the actual meaning of marriage and family and to help parents realise the importance of respecting their children’s wishes and goals by allowing them to select their own life mates. Last but not the least, there is need of a comprehensive law on live in relationship in India.
Dr.S.Krishnan is an Associate Professor in Seedling School of Law and Governance, Jaipur National University, Jaipur.
Ms. Rakshita Saini is 4th year student of BALLB in Seedling School of Law and Governance, Jaipur National University, Jaipur.