The Supreme Court of India has clarified that when a live-in relationship fails, the fallout cannot automatically be treated as a criminal offense. A bench led by Justice B.V. Nagarathna, while hearing a case where a woman filed rape charges after a long-term cohabitation resulted in a child, emphasized the distinction between consensual relationships and criminal sexual offenses. The court questioned how a bond maintained through mutual consent for years could suddenly be termed “rape” once the partners decide to part ways.
Justice Nagarathna highlighted the inherent uncertainties and legal risks associated with live-in relationships. The court noted that while married individuals have clear legal recourse like divorce or maintenance under matrimonial laws, those in live-in arrangements face limited rights if the relationship dissolves. The bench observed that it has become common for women to file sexual assault complaints after such voluntary bonds break down, but stressed that the failure of a consensual relationship does not equate to a crime.
Addressing the humanitarian aspect of the case, the court made a significant observation regarding the children born from such unions. While the parents’ relationship might lack legal standing, the court declared that “a child is never illegitimate.” The bench firmly stated that the child has a right to seek maintenance from the father for their welfare and upbringing. Ultimately, the Supreme Court advised that sensitive disputes of this nature should be resolved through mediation and mutual discussion rather than harsh criminal proceedings.
