Legal Status of Live-in Relationships in Small Town India: Between Constitutional Freedom and Social Reality
Introduction
There is a clear increase in the number of live-in couples in the Indian society recently. The practice of living in has been accepted in many major cities of India such as Mumbai, Delhi, and Bangalore. But, the outlook of people on live-in couples has undergone a drastic change in many other regions of India. People from these parts of India not only consider such couples immoral and shameful, but they also regard them as going against their culture.
The law in India has to some extent tried to recognize and give protection to such relationships. [1]But socially, acceptance still lags far behind as compared to the legal provisions. Especially, in conservative towns, the issues of honour, respectability of families, and peer pressure are very dominant over personal preferences.
It is not just a matter of legality; it is an issue that has implications for human dignity, autonomy, [2]and gender justice, among other things. It is, in essence, a question of whether people can enjoy their constitutional rights without being punished socially.[3]
Live-In Relationship Meaning
A live-in relationship can be defined as the living and maintaining a marriage-like relationship by two people without going through any marriage ceremony or legal process. This kind of relationship is voluntary in nature and does not involve religious or legal ceremonies like marriage.[4]
In the Indian culture, it has always been thought that marriage is more of a sacred ritual than a contractual agreement between two persons. For instance, in smaller towns of India, marriage is more about the family name, caste, religion, and status in society. It is because of these reasons that any other relationship outside marriage receives negative criticisms and judgments from people.
Despite all these views of the society, modern education and changing social values have brought about this new phenomenon of live-in relationships, especially in smaller cities. People living in live-in relationships in these smaller towns face immense pressures from many people such as their families, landlords, and societies.
Constitutional Protection and Individual Liberty
But there are certain constitutional rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India which ensure the right of adults to be able to make a decision to have a live-in relationship. Such a right is guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution,[5] where the right to life and individual liberty also includes a right to privacy, dignity, and autonomy. Time and again, the Supreme Court of India has stated that individuals are entitled to live the way they wish. For instance, in Lata Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh,[6] the court reiterated with force the right of adults in choosing whom they can marry. While the issue in that case was whether inter caste marriage between two consenting adults could be termed criminal, it also paved way for judicial thinking regarding relationship between adults and personal liberty.
As regards another instance where the Supreme Court has stated that having live-in relationships might be morally condemnable but would only be considered immoral conduct and not criminal on its own merit is the case of S Khushboo v Kanniammal[7]. The Court held that live-in relationships between consenting adults come under personal liberty protected under Article 21.
Another landmark ruling that further emphasized the importance of individualism is the judgment made in Justice KS Puttaswamy v Union of India[8] where privacy was recognized as a fundamental right.
Judicial Recognition of Live-in Relationships
There is no special law applicable to live-in relationships in India, but there have been judicial pronouncements regarding live-in relationships. For instance, in D Velusamy v D Patchaiammal, [9]the Supreme Court explained when a live-in relationship will be comparable to a marriage. The Supreme Court stated that relationships of the nature of marriage can be protected legally, especially in relation to the entitlement to maintenance[10].
Moreover, in the landmark case of Indra Sarma v VKV Sarma[11], it is quite clear from the court’s decision that live-in relationships per se are neither sinful nor a crime. Emphasizing on this point, the court was also aware of the risks associated with women living in such relationships, thereby recognizing the necessity for legal protection of their interest. Among others, one of the major advantages available to women in live-in relationships is under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005.[12] According to the said act, a relationship “in the nature of marriage” comes within its purview.[13] Judicial intervention has also been extended to cover children born out of live-in relationships. There have been a series of rulings stating that such children cannot be declared illegitimate simply because their parents never got formally married. [14]This suggests that the Indian judiciary has made an effort to amend its laws so as to reflect reality. It is nevertheless important to remember that the mere amendment of the law does not ensure social acceptance of this reality.
Social Reality in Small-Town India
The social reality for couples living in small-town India can be vastly different from what their constitutional rights state. Live-in relationships are sometimes perceived as immoral or “part of western culture” by the people in many towns. This leads to the couple being socially ridiculed, threatened, and even ostracized from their community. Landlords tend to reject unmarried couples as guests because of the fear of social backlash from the locals. In some cases, the employees working in hotels or apartment societies take matters into their own hands to interfere in their personal affairs. Morality policing by the self-appointed guardians of culture is a common problem in our society.[15]
The woman in the live-in relationship would be seen as “characterless,” while social pressure about her conduct and attire is much higher. Social pressure and the influence of caste/community association also become significant in small towns, because unconventional relationships could be seen as a threat to social structures altogether. Families will use any means necessary to stop this kind of relationship, including emotional blackmail, physical force, forced separation, or honour killing[16]. In other instances, people may be forced to leave their own native place and migrate to large urban centers to lead a life free from all sorts of apprehensions.
Role of Media and Cinema in Changing the Discourse
The Indian film industry as well as media platforms have certainly been instrumental in redefining the discourse on the issue of relationship and individual freedom. Dating and companionship-related content is now openly talked about thanks to various streaming media and social networking websites.[17]
However, mere representation alone will not help in altering age-old societal mindset. In small cities, differences can be seen quite clearly between generations, where the former tend to embrace personal liberty, while the latter still prefer social norms and the status of their families.
On the other hand, access to social media is creating a dilemma for couples. While on one hand it allows greater awareness and freedom of expression, at the same time it brings more online harassment and public shaming.
Challenges in Legal Sphere and Need for Reform
While courts have recognized live-in relationships as a legitimate arrangement, the lack of a legal regime to regulate these relationships raises several issues. Disputes arising from inheritance, property rights, financial obligations, and breakup can persist unresolved[18].
Women become even more vulnerable when a relationship breaks down without any legal repercussions. Even when there is a clause for the Domestic Violence Act, the relevant laws concerning live-in relations are not as effective as marital laws.[19]
It is therefore imperative to formulate some laws that can create a fair balance between individual freedoms and practical needs. Legal sensitization, gender policing, and awareness programs are other important elements that need to be considered for constitutional protection.
Other avenues include education and NGOs who can help instill a culture of consent and respect for adults. Social acceptance of live-in relationships cannot occur only through legal decisions but should come about gradually by changing perceptions.
Conclusion
From the above analysis, it is clear that the position of live-in relationships in India is a result of evolving constitutional morality where the right to freedom and liberty of individuals is considered as crucial[20]. Indian courts have consistently stated that consenting individuals have the right to decide on their own whether or not to get married, and live-in relationship falls under this freedom of individuals.[21]
However, this freedom is yet to be enjoyed fully by couples from small towns in India since there is social stigma, patriarchy and moral policing associated with such a relationship. The case of live-in relationship shows the conflict between modern constitutional morality and conservative nature of Indian society. India is gradually progressing into a modern state, and this progression should include allowing individuals to enjoy their rights even against all social prejudices. In a democracy, there is need for individuals to be able to make their decisions despite all criticisms from society. Constitutional morality requires more than legality and should involve social life too[22].
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Table of Cases
- D Velusamy v D Patchaiammal D Velusamy v D Patchaiammal (2010) 10 SCC 469 (India).
- Indra Sarma v VKV Sarma Indra Sarma v VKV Sarma (2013) 15 SCC 755 (India).
- Indian Young Lawyers Association v State of Kerala Indian Young Lawyers Association v State of Kerala (2019) 11 SCC 1 (India).
- Justice KS Puttaswamy v Union of India Justice KS Puttaswamy v Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1 (India).
- Lata Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh Lata Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh (2006) 5 SCC 475 (India).
- Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India (2018) 10 SCC 1 (India).
- S Khushboo v Kanniammal S Khushboo v Kanniammal (2010) 5 SCC 600 (India).
- Shakti Vahini v Union of India Shakti Vahini v Union of India (2018) 7 SCC 192 (India).
- Tulsa v Durghatiya Tulsa v Durghatiya (2008) 4 SCC 520 (India).
Legislation
- Constitution of India.
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005.
Journal Articles
- Kannabiran K, ‘Gender and Moral Policing in India’ (2012) 47 Economic and Political Weekly 67.
- Chatterji S, ‘Changing Urban Relationships in Contemporary India’ (2019) 54 Economic and Political Weekly 22.
Online Sources
[1] Indra Sarma v VKV Sarma (2013) 15 SCC 755 (India).
[2] INDIA CONST art 21.
[3] INDIA CONST art 21.
[4] D Velusamy v D Patchaiammal (2010) 10 SCC 469 (India).
[5] INDIA CONST art 21.
[6] Lata Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh (2006) 5 SCC 475 (India).
[7] S Khushboo v Kanniammal (2010) 5 SCC 600 (India).
[8] Justice KS Puttaswamy v Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1 (India).
[9] D Velusamy v D Patchaiammal (2010) 10 SCC 469 (India)
[10] Ibid
[11] Indra Sarma v VKV Sarma (2013) 15 SCC 755 (India).
[12] Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005
[13] Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005, s 2(f).
[14] Tulsa v Durghatiya (2008) 4 SCC 520 (India).
[15] Kalpana Kannabiran, ‘Gender and Moral Policing in India’ (2012) 47 Economic and Political Weekly 67.
[16] Shakti Vahini v Union of India (2018) 7 SCC 192 (India).
[17] Shubhra Chatterji, ‘Changing Urban Relationships in Contemporary India’ (2019) 54 Economic and Political Weekly 22.
[18] Indra Sarma v VKV Sarma (2013) 15 SCC 755 (India).
[19] Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005.
[20] Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India (2018) 10 SCC 1 (India).
[21] S Khushboo v Kanniammal (2010) 5 SCC 600 (India).
[22] Indian Young Lawyers Association v State of Kerala (2019) 11 SCC 1 (India).
Author: Mansi Mishra
Worked with Little Akshar Pre-Primary School Undergraduate law student at GGSIPU, Delhi (BBA LLB)