Living Together For A Few Days Not Enough To Hold That Two Adults Are Truly In A 'Live-In-Relation': Punjab & Haryana High Court

While dealing with a protection plea filed by a couple who are in a live-in relationship, the Punjab and Haryana High Court recently observed that merely because two adults are living together for a few days, their claim of live-in-relationship based upon bald averment may not be enough to hold that they are truly in live-in-relationship.

Observing thus, the bench of Justice Manoj Bajaj dismissed the plea with Rs. 25K Cost as it noted that the petition had been filed without a valid cause of action.

The Case in brief

Essentially, the bench was dealing with the plea filed by a girl aged 18 years and boy aged 20 years, who claimed that they fell in love with each other, and decided to marry on attaining the age of majority.

It was averred in their protection plea that since the parents of the Girl have turned against their alliance and have decided to marry her with a boy of their own choice, and also warned them to implicate them in false criminal case, therefore, they are now living together in a live in-relationship.

During the course of hearing, it was told to the court that petitioners have started residing together in live-in relationship (in a hotel) w.e.f. November 24, 2021 (date of court's order being 26 November).

Court's observations

At the outset, the Court opined that the apprehension of threat expressed by the petitioners does not seem to be genuine. The Court also observed that no complaint had been made so far against them by the private respondents.

However, the Court did add that even if a complaint is given to the police by any of the private respondents against the petitioners, then it cannot be construed as threat to their life and liberty, as private respondents are also free to avail their remedy in law in case, they feel that some offence has been committed.

Further, the Court said that the society, for the last few years, has been experiencing profound changes in social values, especially amongst exuberant youngsters, who seldom in pursuit of absolute freedom, leave the company of their parents etc. to live with the person of their choice.

The Court also remarked that the protection pleas filed by such couples are ordinarily based on the sole ground of apprehension of threat predicted against the disapproving parents or other close relatives of the girl only, as the decision of the couple is rarely opposed by the family members of the boy.

"Their right to live together is either based on their sudden, secretive and small destination marriage or upon live-in-relationship...Majority of such petitions contain formal symbolic averments, grounds with imaginary cause of action, and are rarely founded upon 'actual' or 'real' existence of threat, and these types of cases consume considerable time of this court, that too at the cost of many other cases waiting in line for hearing," the Court sternly remarked.

Concludingly, while dismissing the plea, the Court also opined that the length of the live in relationship coupled with discharge of certain duties and responsibilities towards each other makes such relationships akin to the marital relations.

Case title - Himani and another v. State of Haryana and others

Click here To Download Order

Read Order