GUWAHATI: The Chhattisgarh High Court recently stated that live-in relationships are preferred over marriages because they offer a convenient escape when things don't work out between partners, unlike marriage which is viewed as a social contract with legal obligations.
A division bench of Justices Goutam Bhaduri and Sanjay S Agrawal highlighted that marriage provides security, social acceptance, progress, and stability, which are not typically afforded by live-in relationships.
Click here to join our WhatsApp channel
"A live-in relationship is preferred over marriage because it provides a convenient escape when things fail to work between partners. If the couple wishes to break up, they enjoy the freedom to split unilaterally, irrespective of the consent of the other party and without having to go through the cumbersome legal formalities in court," the bench said in its judgement.
However, the court acknowledged that marriage can sometimes result in unequal relationships, with women often being at a disadvantage when a marriage fails. On the other hand, they noted that women are typically the most vulnerable in live-in relationships, and therefore, they require special protections.
ALSO READ: Live-In Partners Can Not Seek Divorce, Says Kerala HC
"It is very easy for the married man to walk out of a live-in relationship and in such case the courts cannot shut their eyes to the vulnerable condition of the survivor of such distressful live-in relationships and children born out of such relationships," the bench stated.
The court's observations came during a hearing of a habeas corpus petition filed by a man seeking custody of his child born out of a live-in relationship. The man had a live-in relationship with a woman, and they had a child together in 2021. The relationship soured, leading the woman to leave with the child in August 2023.
ALSO READ: Live-In-Relationships Part And Parcel Of Life: Allahabad HC
The man approached the family court for custody, arguing that he could provide for the child. However, his application was rejected, prompting him to file a petition in the High Court.
The High Court, however, dismissed the petition, reiterating that live-in relationships are not widely accepted in Indian culture and can be seen as a social stigma.
ALSO READ: Consensual Sex between live-in partners not rape if man fails to marry: Supreme Court
"Live-in relationships are an imported philosophy contrary to the general expectations of Indian tenets. No trick would be available to hide the spot. In Indian tradition, each citizen possesses a sense of self that is unique and unlikely to be confused with imported traditions. There cannot be mere inglorious object than to adopt a live-in relationship to destroy the interwoven culture in society and tradition," the bench noted.
