In a significant ruling affirming personal liberties, the Allahabad High Court has directed police protection for twelve live-in couples who alleged threats from their families. The court firmly stated that while such relationships might not enjoy social acceptance, they are not illegal, and living together without marriage does not constitute an offence.
Court's Landmark Order on Protection and Liberty
A single bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Singh, in an order passed on December 17, held that the right to human life stands on a "much higher pedestal," applicable equally to minors and adults, married or unmarried. The court heard all twelve petitions together, where couples had moved the court after failing to secure adequate security from local police.
Justice Singh ruled that adults in a live-in relationship are entitled to the protection of life and personal liberty from the state. The court directed the petitioners to approach the Police Commissioner or the Senior Superintendent/ Superintendent of Police with a certified copy of the order. The officers have been instructed to provide immediate protection after confirming that the individuals are majors and are living together of their own free will.
For cases where documentary proof of age is unavailable, the court authorized the police to conduct ossification tests or use other lawful methods to verify age.
Constitutional Rights Override Social Morality
The bench made a clear distinction between social morality and constitutional legality. It observed that the more pertinent question was whether the Constitution protects adults in live-in relationships, rather than whether society accepts them.
"The petitioners herein, who are major, have taken a decision to reside together without the sanctity of marriage and it is not for the courts to judge them on their decision," the bench said. It added that the mere fact that the petitioners had not solemnized their marriage would not deprive them of their fundamental rights as Indian citizens.
The judgment referenced the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which recognizes non-marital cohabitation by providing remedies to women in "domestic relationships" without mandating marriage. The court also cited Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act (and its equivalent in the new Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023), which presumes a couple to be married if they live together as husband and wife for a significant period, a presumption meant to protect women and children from such relationships.
Affirming the Right to Choose a Partner
The court emphasized that once an individual attains the age of majority, they are legally free to decide where and with whom to live. "Once an individual, who is a major, has chosen his/her partner, it is not for any other person, be it a family member, to object and cause a hindrance to their peaceful existence," the bench noted.
Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the judgment affirmed that the right to choose a partner forms an integral part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. Blocking such a choice, the court stated, affects both human rights and constitutional freedoms.
Justice Singh also addressed earlier High Court decisions that had refused protection to live-in couples. He distinguished the present cases, noting that the petitioners were adults who had committed no offence, and thus found no legal basis to deny their request for protection. "It is the bounden duty of the state, as per the Constitutional obligations cast upon it, to protect the life and liberty of every citizen," the court concluded.
