Legal Rights of Live-in Partners

 

                 Legal Rights of Live-in Partners 

 

   

AI-generated image

In a society, a change can't be easily accepted; it can take decades to get accustomed to it. Most of us prefer the comfort of history over the uncertainty of the future. For this reason, we often resist or even fear the idea of change. This resistance to change is especially evident in Indian society, which values its attachment to traditional customs. In which the common tradition is to have a family based on the concept of matrimony.

There are ideological conflicts, especially among the younger generations like  millennial generation and Generation X, questioning “whether marriage is necessary for a man and woman to live together?” It is about personal choice, supported by law as long as both individuals are consenting adults. The relationship between a man and a woman is always seen as that of being a married couple living together rather than as the two individuals opting for living together without marital status before getting into a big commitment as trying to get to know each other.

 

Is a Live-In Relationship Legal in India? 

   The concept of a live-in relationship is generally said to living together without tying the knot. In India, live-in relationship is not seen as illegal or criminally wrong, but as a nonconformist in society. A live-in relationship was not recognised as a legal union; Later, the modern culture stepped into India, questioning India’s culture about the holy sacrament nature of marriage.

The first case regarding a live-in relationship in India is Badri Prasad v. Dy. Director of Consolidation (1978), the Supreme Court of India established a strong presumption of marriage for couples who have cohabited for a long period. If a man and woman live together for a significant time, the law presumes they are legally married, and the burden of proof lies on the person who wishes to deny the legitimacy of the relationship.

Every relationship is based on mutual trust and faith, but under some circumstances, the relationship can turn into violence and become unbearable to tolerate. That’s when the Supreme Court of India protected women from the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 where the female live-in relationship partner will be allowed under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. This section provides a legal framework for the maintenance of spouses, children, and parents who are unable to support themselves. Under the case of Lalita Toppo vs The State of Jharkhand (2018), the Supreme Court of India stated that a female live-in partner who faces domestic violence can claim maintenance even though she is not a legally wedded wife.

Can children who are born out of wedlock claim the rights of property? Yes, under Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act and Section 26 of the Special Marriage Act, 1956 reserves that children born in void or voidable marriage, and a live-in relationship, fall within this provision. In the case of Bharatha Matha & Anr vs R. Vijaya Renganathan & Ors (2010), the Supreme Court of India made a statement that “a child born of a void or voidable marriage is not entitled to claim inheritance in ancestral coparcenary property but is entitled only to claim share in self-acquired properties, if any”.

The position of live-in relationships in other countries

In a mythological sense, Adam and Eve, who are considered the first unmarried couple, did not hold any ceremonies or have a marriage certificate. Western nations never view marriage as a religious institution and are not particularly concerned with maintaining responsibilities. With the gradual changes in society, the judiciary also needs to be flexible and acknowledge the bond between men and women.

United States

State-specific regulations on cohabitation exist in the United States. Common law marriage is recognised in some places, meaning that after living together for a specific amount of time, a couple is deemed legally married. The phrase “palimony” was used to describe supporting a woman who lived with a man for a significant amount of time without being married and who is later abandoned by him. The first case involving palimony was Taylor v. Fields and Marvin v. Marvin. In both cases, the well-known actor Lee Marvin was involved, and Michelle, a woman, lived with him for a long time without being married before he abandoned her and filed for palimony

European Union

Only in Germany and the Netherlands are just a few of European nations that have passed legislation accepting cohabitation and giving single couples legal rights. These laws guarantee that couples in cohabitation have access to legal remedies and safeguards, and they usually address matters like property rights, inheritance, maintenance, and child custody.

United Kingdom

Married couples are entitled to certain legal privileges and status, which are not available to live-in couples. Individuals in these kinds of relationships are unrestricted. There is no Bereavement Allowance programme for widowed spouses, and partners cannot inherit each other's property. The legislation, however, aims to safeguard the rights of a child born into such a partnership. It is the responsibility of both parents to raise their children.

 

Conclusion

We can conclude that a live-in relationship is about personal liberty, not societal restriction on social norms of marriage. There must be action from legislation regarding the rights and safeguards of all parties involved. The dynamic nature of society necessitates the development of a codified legal framework which covers a wide range of issues such as maintenance obligations, domestic violence, child custody and inheritance. Many same sex couples are contemplating a live-in relationship, because the government has yet to recognise the legality of same sex and LGBTQ relationships. Though this culture has been adapted from Western countries, we must respect the rights of individuals and the independence of full-grown adults.

                                                                                                                                Anantha Konda

                                                                                                                                 2/5 YDC