A married Muslim cannot claim rights in a live-in relationship, as such a relationship is not permitted under Islam, the Allahabad high court said on Wednesday.
Also Read: Live-in partner hacks woman to death in Bareilly
“Islamic tenets do not permit live-in relationships during the subsisting marriage,” a bench of Justices AR Masoodi and AK Srivastava observed, adding that the position would be different if a couple living together are both adults, do not have a living spouse, and choose to lead their lives in their own way.
The bench also stated that there must be a “balance” between constitutional morality and social morality in the matter of marriage institutions. In the absence of this “balance,” the social cohesion needed for peace and tranquility in the society, would “fade and disappear,” it added.
Also Read: Woman arrested for trying to extort ₹30 lakh from live-in partner
The court was hearing a writ petition filed by Sneha Devi and Mohammad Shadab Khan, who sought protection from police action after the woman's parents filed a police complaint against Khan, accusing him of “kidnapping” and “inducing” their daughter to marry him. The petitioners, who claimed to be adults, also sought protection under Article 21 (protection of life and liberty) of the Constitution of India.
{{/usCountry}}The court was hearing a writ petition filed by Sneha Devi and Mohammad Shadab Khan, who sought protection from police action after the woman's parents filed a police complaint against Khan, accusing him of “kidnapping” and “inducing” their daughter to marry him. The petitioners, who claimed to be adults, also sought protection under Article 21 (protection of life and liberty) of the Constitution of India.
{{/usCountry}}Following an inquiry, the court came to know that Khan got married in 2020 to Farida Khatoon and they have a child. It also directed the police to send Devi, his live-in partner, back to her parents under security.
Also Read: Are live-in relationships good for mental health? 5 pros and cons explained
On the petitioners' Article 21 argument, the bench noted that the former have a case that is “different.”
“The constitutional protection under Article 21 would not lend an un-canalised support to such a right (life and liberty), once the usages and customs prohibit such a relationship between the two individuals of different faiths,” it said.
(With PTI inputs)