In India, marriage is socially as well as ritually accepted, which is indeed a contract that imposes duties and responsibilities on each other. As India has a diverse culture, there are different laws, guidelines and procedures for marriage across different religions. The Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) also has provisions ensuring inter alia protection of the wife in a marital relationship like its Section 125 ‘on order for maintenance of wives, children and parents’. Though live-in relationships have been talked about over the years, the legal coverage for binding the partners as also legal definition is non-existent. Further, religions prevalent in India don’t accept live-in relationships. However, the protection for women in India offered inter alia through various laws, say, protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 etc applies across cases. Various court decisions in India have also highlighted that live-in relationships may lead to vulnerability as children born out of such relationships suffer the most which indeed demand remedial measures through legislation. Further, decisions do not question the illegality of a man and woman living together.
Indian society is traditionally governed by rules, regulations, culture and so on. The institution of marriage is thus strictly bound by those rules. This may necessitate partners to attend religious events of key importance, participate in joint functions, convincing the public of the responsibilities of partners in a marital relationship. These practices may indeed compromise the professional positions held by the partner (s) which may lead to breakup in relationships and other inconveniences. Further, marriage indirectly mandates the responsibilities of partners as per their respective religions, and may also lead to sharing of their earnings and financial responsibilities. Live-in relationships are flexible in this context, as they are built in to mutually respect each other and fulfil their respective ambitions. Further, moving out of the relationship is also not complex, contrary to marriage, which demands proceedings as per rule books. However, these may not apply to exceptional cases of marriage among professionals, wherein, there is a high level of mutual understanding, love and care.
Other scenarios of live-in relationships exist when couples test living together relationship prior to marriage to check the compatibility of marriage. This may enable them to understand each other and work out a deeper bond before marriage. Live-in relationships happen mostly in cases where the partners are working together or are destined to be in a particular place for a long period of time, the best example being the scenarios in tech cities like Bengaluru. This may save the time for travelling long distances to meet their partners. Further, other aspects such as religion, caste, and community have insignificant role in this relationship.
Live-in relationship is neither a Western nor a modern Indian phenomenon. The same was existent in ancient times or traditional society too, under different names like ‘Gandharva Vivvah’, which is a marriage-like relationship without the consent of parents, mentioned in ancient scriptures. Similar bonding is also mentioned in various scriptures irrespective of religion.
International Scenario
In the US, though prior to 1970, live-in relationships were illegal, it gained status as a Common Law with certain requirements which include inter alia granting maintenance to a woman who lived with a man without marrying for a substantive period of time but is not eligible for inherited property rights. In Canada, if couples have lived together for 12 consecutive months or gave birth/adopted a child, federal law grants the same rights as married couples. While France has provisions which bring rights and responsibilities for partners in live-in relationships but less so than those for marriage. The Philippines envisages a co-ownership rule for the right to property wherein couples’ salaries/wages shall be owned by them in equal shares. In the UK, parents are responsible for the child born through living together relationships and it also accepts contract/living together agreements mutually agreed/signed by partners in those relationships. While Scotland confers legal sanctity for live-in relationships based on length, nature of relationship and nature of financial agreements, Australia assumes it as a de-facto relationship. In China, for live-in relationships and for closing the same, no legal procedure is required. In countries such as Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Maldives etc, live-in relationship is not allowed.
Studies, globally, on live-in relationship suggests that it may not lead to a stable family for the creation of a contented society and this may indeed be complex in India due to the traditional nature of its society. Trust and commitment are more essential than sexual freedom for lifelong relationships between partners. At the same time, society must give youth the freedom to select their partners rather than key common characteristics such as family status, profession, religion, caste, colour etc.
In this evolving tech era, disruptive technologies are already designing the pattern of how goods and services are devised, marketed and reached the ultimate consumers, with wide-ranging effects on the working and chemistry of the world economy. Their diffusion is indeed unprecedented which may have far-reaching implications on business patterns, and competitiveness, and so is the case with relationships between humans including family lives. In this evolving tech era, the legal institution of marriage may be tested and some sort of rebalancing between live-in relationships and marriage may evolve over time. This might be in the form of indirect legal sanctity conferring rights on inherited property or similar such issues or legal protection for partners especially woman or children in those relationships.
Surjith Karthikeyan serves as Civil Servant at Indian Ministry of Finance. Views are personal.
Read all the Latest Opinions here
Comments
0 comment