Introduction
The Allahabad High Court has clarified that live-in relationships between consenting adults are not illegal under Indian law. The Single Judge struck down a previous Division Bench order that had labelled such relationships as a “social problem.” The court also held that the State must protect couples living together from harassment or violence. This order reinforces constitutional rights and brings clarity on the legality of live-in relationships in Uttar Pradesh.
Facts of the Case
A petition reached the Allahabad High Court after a Division Bench previously expressed concern over live-in relationships and described them as socially harmful. That older order had created confusion over whether such relationships were unlawful. In the latest hearing, the court examined the legality of live-in relationships and the rights of couples. The case referenced earlier judgments, including Kiran Rawat & Another vs. State of UP, where live-in ties were questioned by the Division Bench in 2023.
The petitioners argued that they faced harassment from family members because they lived together without marriage. They asked the court to confirm that their relationship was legal and to order police protection. The Single Judge agreed to reconsider the earlier Division Bench’s stance.
What the Court Says
The court held that live-in relationships between consenting adults are not illegal. It said living together without marriage does not amount to a crime under Indian law. The judge observed that many people may not accept these relationships socially, but that does not make them unlawful. The order stressed that the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 protects choices about personal relationships.
The court also stated that the State has a duty to protect couples in live-in relationships from violence or harassment. Protection extends to police intervention where necessary. The judge rejected any suggestion that non-marital cohabitation is a legal offense.
In making this ruling, the court referenced Indian constitutional principles that place individual autonomy and privacy above moral judgments. It noted that courts must avoid moralizing personal relationships and should instead apply settled legal standards.
The Single Judge explicitly disapproved of the Division Bench’s earlier description of live-in relationships as a “social problem,” stating that rights recognized by the Constitution cannot be limited by subjective moral views.
For any specific query call at +91 – 8569843472
Implications
This order has important implications for family law and rights protection in India. First, it reinforces that live-in relationships are legal and cannot be treated as crimes. Second, it strengthens the ability of couples to seek police protection when facing threats or harassment due to their relationship. Third, lawyers can now cite this decision in petitions involving harassment or threats against live-in partners.
The ruling promotes a rights-based approach to personal relationships. It aligns with Supreme Court decisions that recognize personal liberty and dignity for consenting adults. The judgment may also discourage lower courts from relying on subjective moral standards when deciding similar cases.
However, because this is a Single Judge’s order, it may not automatically overturn all Division Bench precedents unless higher courts rule on the issue. Still, the order sends a strong message for legal protection, not moral judgment, in cases involving consensual relationships.
