Supreme Court not trying to promote live-in relationships: Allahabad HC

The bench, however, dismissed the petition noting that the interfaith couple approached the court with mere unsubstantiated allegations

Lucknow: The views expressed by the Supreme Court pertaining to live-in relationships “cannot be considered to promote such relationships”, the Allahabad high court observed as it rejected a petition filed by an interfaith live-in couple seeking protection against alleged harassment by the police, Live Law has reported.

It also said that observations made by the Supreme Court pertaining to live-in relationships should be read in the context of the facts of each case (Representational image)

The court also stressed upon the need to create awareness regarding the emotional and societal pressures and legal hassles that may be created by live-in relations, as it recently observed that traditionally, law has been biased in favour of marriage.

The observations were made by a division bench of justices Sangeeta Chandra and Narendra Kumar Johari, which was hearing a writ petition filed by a Muslim man (30) and a Hindu woman (29) claiming they were facing harassment from the police and sought court’s protection citing apex court’s ruling in the 2006 Lata Singh case.

The bench, however, dismissed the petition noting that the interfaith couple approached the court with mere unsubstantiated allegations. “They have also not stated anywhere in the writ petition any specific instance of the police coming and knocking their doors or taking them to the police station…” the bench was quoted as saying by Live Law.

It also said that observations made by the Supreme Court pertaining to live-in relationships should be read in the context of the facts of each case.

“The Observations of the Supreme Court as aforesaid however cannot be considered to promote such relationships. Law traditionally has been biased in favour of marriage. It reserves many rights and privileges to married persons to preserve and encourage the institution of marriage…” the bench added.

The high court also noted that the apex court has refused to extend the meaning of the word “wife” as denoted in Section 125 of the CrPC to include such live-in partners for maintenance claims.