‘No Live-In Relation At Cost Of Country’s Social Fabric': Allahabad HC Denies Protection To Married Woman Living With Partner

However, the bench of Justice Renu Agarwal further clarified that the Court is not against live-in relationships but against illegal relations.

“…this Court does not deem it proper to permit the parties to such illegality as tomorrow petitioners may convey that we have sanctified their illicit relations. Live-in-relationship cannot be at the cost of the social fabric of this Country. Directing the police to grant protection to them may indirectly give our assent to such illicit relations.”

Essentially, the bench was approached by a 37-year-old married woman and her live-in partner (petitioner no.2) by submitting that though she is not married to him, however, she voluntarily entered into a live-in relationship with him due to the apathetic behaviour of her husband (respondent no. 4).

It was her further case, that her husband (respondent no.4) is trying to endanger their peaceful lives and hence, she prayed for police protection.

On the other hand, the Standing Counsel for the State respondents submitted that this type of relationship cannot be supported by the Court and further submitted that a division bench of the HC has already disapproved such acts in the case of Aneeta and another Vs. The state of U.P. and others wherein, in similar facts and circumstances, it had dismissed the protection plea of a married woman living with her partner with an exemplary cost of Rs.5,000.

Taking into account the ruling of the HC in the case of Aneeta (supra), the Bench, while observing that such a relationship cannot be allowed to exist at the cost of society’s fabric, dismissed their plea.

Advocate Brajesh Kumar Singh appeared for the petitioners

Case title - Suneeta And Another vs. State Of U P And 3 Others 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 204 [WRIT - C No. - 2723 of 2023]

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 204

Click Here To Read/Download Order