Contracts, Cohabitation, and Controversy: How Indian Courts Are Redefining Live-In Relationships

Introduction

Live-in relationships—where two adults cohabit without marrying—are increasingly common in India’s urban landscape. While these arrangements reflect changing social attitudes and personal autonomy, they also raise complex legal questions. Indian law does not specifically define or regulate live-in relationships, but courts have played a crucial role in shaping their legal status and extending certain protections. This blog explores the legal framework, key judicial decisions, pros and cons, and recent developments regarding live-in relationships in India.

Legal Aspects of Live-in Relationships

Statutory and Constitutional Framework

No Specific Statute: Indian law does not have a dedicated statute for live-in relationships. Instead, protections are derived from constitutional rights and judicial interpretations.
Constitutional Backing: Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, which courts have interpreted to include the right of consenting adults to cohabit without marriage.
Judicial Recognition: The Supreme Court and High Courts have repeatedly held that live-in relationships are not illegal or criminal. However, their recognition and the rights arising from them depend on the facts of each case and judicial interpretation.

Protection Under Domestic Violence Act, 2005

The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDVA), extends certain protections to women in live-in relationships. The Act recognizes “relationships in the nature of marriage,” allowing aggrieved women to seek relief from abuse, maintenance, and residence orders. The Supreme Court has outlined factors for such recognition, including duration, shared household, financial arrangements, and social perception.

Maintenance and Inheritance Rights

Maintenance:Courts have held that women in qualifying live-in relationships may be entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, provided the relationship is stable and resembles marriage.
Legitimacy of Children:Children born from live-in relationships are considered legitimate and have inheritance rights from their parents, as affirmed by the Supreme Court.
Inheritance Between Partners:Unless the relationship is deemed “in the nature of marriage,” partners may not automatically inherit each other’s property.

Recent Judgments

The Rajasthan High Court’s recent decision in Reena v. State of Rajasthan (2025) marks a pivotal moment in the legal treatment of live-in relationships in India.

Background of the Case

A group of petitioners, from various states, approached the Rajasthan High Court seeking protection from threats and harassment by their families and society due to their choice to be in live-in relationships. The respondents included the State, police authorities, and family members alleged to be threatening the petitioners. Their plea raised fundamental questions about the rights of individuals in non-traditional relationships and the scope of constitutional protection under Article 21.

Legal Issues Examined

Whether individuals in live-in relationships, particularly when one or both partners are still legally married to other individuals, are entitled to protection of their life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Judicial Reasoning and Precedents

The Court acknowledged that while live-in relationships are becoming more common in India, they are not formally recognized under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and are generally not permissible under Muslim law. However, the Supreme Court has previously held in cases like S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal (2010) and Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma (2013) that such relationships are not illegal and are protected by the Constitution.

Further, the Court referred to D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal (2010), where the Supreme Court identified criteria for a live-in relationship to be considered similar to marriage, such as public acknowledgment, legal age, and the absence of existing marriages.

Conflicting Judicial Approaches

The Rajasthan High Court reviewed its own previous decisions:

In Favor of Protection: In cases like Leela Bishnoi v. State of Rajasthan (2021) and Manisha Devi v. State of Rajasthan (2023), the Court granted protection to live-in couples, stressing that constitutional rights outweigh societal morality.
Against Protection: Conversely, in cases where one partner was already married (Rashika Khandal v. State of Rajasthan, 2021), protection was denied. Similar stances were seen in other High Courts, such as the Punjab & Haryana and Allahabad High Courts, where protection was refused for live-in relationships involving married individuals.

The Need for Legislative Clarity

The Court highlighted the lack of a comprehensive law governing live-in relationships, which has led to inconsistent judicial decisions. While Uttarakhand’s Uniform Civil Code (2024) now regulates live-in relationships in that state, there is no such law at the national level. The Court urged both Central and State Governments to enact legislation addressing the rights, responsibilities, and protection mechanisms for those in live-in relationships.

Court’s Directives and Interim Measures

Recognizing the urgent need for consistency, the Court proposed a temporary system for registering live-in relationships. The suggested framework includes:

Mandatory registration of live-in relationships with a competent authority.
Clearly defined financial and maintenance responsibilities, especially for children and non-earning partners.
Appointment of a nodal officer in each district to oversee registrations and handle protection requests.

Referral to a Larger Bench

Given the conflicting judgments on whether married individuals can seek protection for live-in relationships, the Court referred this crucial legal question to a Special/Larger Bench. The aim is to provide a definitive ruling that will guide future cases and ensure uniformity in judicial approach.

Conclusion

Live-in relationships in India have gradually gained legal recognition, primarily through progressive judicial pronouncements and selective legislative efforts. While significant rights and safeguards exist (especially for women and children) the lack of comprehensive national legislation results in ambiguity and uneven enforcement. Recent initiatives like the Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code and landmark judgments from various High Courts signal a shift toward greater legal clarity and protection for individuals in live-in relationships. However, societal challenges and legal uncertainties remain.

As Indian society continues to evolve, it is imperative for lawmakers to develop a uniform legal framework that balances personal liberty with societal interests, ensuring justice and security for all individuals, regardless of their chosen form of partnership.

Resources

Author- Smriti Singh

Pursuing BA LLB from NMIMS Kirit. P. Mehta School of Law, Mumbai

Contracts, Cohabitation, and Controversy: How Indian Courts Are Redefining Live-In Relationships

Our Office

Email Us

Call Us