The Delhi High Court recently made a significant judgment regarding live-in relationships involving married adults. In a ruling delivered on September 13, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma emphasized the distinction between moral disapproval from a societal perspective and criminal wrongdoing under the law. The court held that while some in society might criticize live-in relationships between married individuals, it is not a criminal offense. The judgment highlighted that the legal system should not legislate against acts based on perceived morality.
The court firmly stated that judges, despite their personal views on such relationships, cannot attribute criminality to them based on their own moral beliefs. Imposing criminality on actions not legislated against due to perceived morality was considered a dangerous proposition by the court. The judgment emphasized that individual adults are free to make decisions that may diverge from societal norms, but they must be prepared to face the potential consequences of such choices.
This ruling was delivered in response to a plea filed by a man seeking the quashing of an FIR registered against him for alleged rape. The woman involved had claimed that she was induced into a sexual relationship under the false pretext of marriage. The court clarified that Section 376 of the IPC, which deals with rape, cannot be invoked when the victim was not legally entitled to marry the accused due to her existing marriage to another person.
Furthermore, the court stressed the importance of treating both parties in such cases equally and avoiding gender-based distinctions. It condemned the use of derogatory language against the woman in legal pleadings.
Regarding the issue of both parties being married to other individuals and still engaging in a live-in relationship, the court reiterated that such acts may be socially unacceptable but are not criminal offenses. Courts, according to the judgment, should not act as moral arbiters but should instead assess the criminal aspects of each case independently.
The court affirmed that women have the right to make choices as equals, and these choices should be respected, rejecting the traditional burden of morality placed on women. Ultimately, the court allowed the man's plea to quash the FIR, as it was evident that the woman was not legally eligible to marry someone else due to her existing marriage. Therefore, the court concluded that she could not claim to have been induced into a sexual relationship under the pretext of marriage.
Advocate S Selvakumari represented the petitioner, S Rajadurai, while Additional Standing Counsel Rupali Bandhopadhya represented the State. Advocates Varun Kumar, MD Jangra, and Shitanshu appeared for the complainant woman.
Click Here to: Download/View Related File
TAGS: Delhi High Court Live-in Relationships Married Adults Legality Landmark Ruling.
