Live-ins have no social sanction, time for youth to uphold moral values: Allahabad HC

The bench, in the order dated January 16, noted that the increasing attraction to such relationships stems from the ease with which individuals, regardless of gender, can evade responsibilities towards their partners (Image: X)

The Allahabad High Court recently expressed concerns about the rising inclination of young people towards live-in relationships.

A bench of Justice Nalin Kumar Srivastava remarked, “The moral values and the normal conduct of the young generation in the family, society or at their workplace are changing swiftly. So far as the live-in relationship is concerned, it has got no social sanction."

The bench, in the order dated January 16, noted that the increasing attraction to such relationships stems from the ease with which individuals, regardless of gender, can evade responsibilities towards their partners.

The bench cautioned, “It is high time we all reflect on this issue and work towards developing a framework to preserve the moral values of society."

The observations were made by the bench while granting bail to a man accused under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

The case arose from allegations that the man engaged in a live-in relationship with the complainant, assured her of marriage, and later retracted his promise. The charges also included accusations of caste-based abuse, coercion, and threats to release obscene material.

The court found merit in the man’s bail plea. It observed that the complainant, a major, had engaged in the relationship consensually. The court further noted discrepancies in the complainant’s statements recorded during the investigation and considered the six-year duration of the live-in relationship, during which the complainant accompanied the accused to various locations without raising objections.

Conclusively, the court found no evidence of coercion or lack of consent in the prosecution’s case. Therefore, it ruled that the Special Judge (SC/ST Act) in Varanasi had wrongly denied bail to the man.

In view of the same, the court allowed bail to the accused and directed him to adhere to strict conditions, including non-tampering with evidence, non-intimidation of witnesses, and regular court appearances. Any violation of these conditions, the court warned, would invite bail cancellation.