Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has voiced concerns about live-in relationships involving individuals who are already married. The court highlighted the potential harm to family reputations and the dignity and honour of parents.

Justice Sandeep Moudgil, presiding over the court remarked “The concept of right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India includes the right to live with dignity and the petitioners by running away from their parental home is not only bringing bad name to the family but also is violating the right of the parents to live with dignity and honour.” The court made the remarks while addressing petitions, seeking police protection, filed by three couples engaged in live-in relationships despite their existing marital commitments.

The Court ruled against granting police protection to the petitioners, arguing that providing such protection would implicitly endorse these relationships, potentially undermining societal norms and moral values deeply embedded in Indian culture. While acknowledging that Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, including the right to live with dignity, the Court maintained that this right must be exercised within legal boundaries.

The Court noted “Under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution each and every individual has a right to live with peace, dignity and honour, therefore, by allowing such type of petitions we are encouraging the wrongdoers and somewhere promoting the practice of bigamy which is otherwise an offence under Section 494 IPC, further violating the right of the other spouse and children under Article 21 to live with dignity.”

Referencing the judgment delivered in the case of Smt. Aneeta and Another v State of U.P. and Others by the Allahabad High Court, wherein it was held that permitting such relationships would imply an endorsement of illegality, potentially leading petitioners to believe their illicit relations had been sanctified, the court observed “Live-in relationship cannot be at the cost of social fabric of this Country.”

In dismissing the petitions, the court stressed that “the orders cannot be passed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India which guarantees freedom of life to all citizens, but such freedom has to be within the ambit of law.” However, the court allowed the petitioners to approach the police for protection if the petitioners could demonstrate a genuine threat to their lives, subject to verification of their claims.

 

Cause Title: X v State of Haryana & Ors [CRWP 4019 0f 2024 and other connected matters]