HC: Few days of living together isn’t live-in

HC: Few days of living together isn’t live-in

TIMES NEWS NETWORK

Chandigarh: 16.12.2021

The Punjab and Haryana HC has made it clear that merely because two adults live together for a few days, their claim of a live-in relationship based upon “bald averment” may not be enough to hold that they are truly in a live-in relationship.

It was of the view that “the length of the relationship coupled with the discharge of certain duties and responsibilities towards each other makes such a relationship akin to marital relations”.

Justice Manoj Bajaj passed these orders while dismissing a plea filed by a couple from Haryana’s Yamunanagar district seeking protection from their family members. The couple claimed to have been in a live-in relationship for the past few days. The HC has also imposed a cost of Rs 25,000 on the couple for filing such a petition.

“No doubt the other concept of a live-in relationship between two adults of the opposite gender has got recognition in India also as the legislature has injected some legitimacy into this kind of alliance while promulgating the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and liberally defined ‘domestic relationship’ in Section 2(f). However some sections of society are reluctant to accept such relationships,” the HC said and held that the length of the relationship and their duties towards each other would count. The court also observed that society, for the last few years, has been experiencing profound changes in social values, especially amongst youngsters who seldom in pursuit of absolute freedom leave the company of their parents, etc. to live with the person of their choice, and further, in order to get the seal of the court on their alliance, they file petitions for protection by claiming a threat to life and liberty.

“A large number of petitions land in the lap of this court as according to writ petitions alternative remedy is less felicitous (sic),” the judge said. “The majority of such petitions contain formal symbolic averments, grounds with imaginary cause of action, and are rarely founded upon ‘actual’ or ‘real’ existence of a threat,” the HC held.

The HC said youngsters in pursuit of freedom leave their parents’ company to live with the person of their choice. In order to get the court’s seal on their alliance, they file petitions for protection