Barely 10% of live-in relationships reach the stage of marriage. In the remaining 90% of cases, the relationship breaks. Just like today’s young lovers propose as fast as they break up and then change their lovers as fast. Such lovers find the tempting practice of live-in relationships to be correct. Because they get a chance to live with each other like a husband and wife without marriage, and you understand the meaning of a husband-wife relationship very well. That is why after a relationship breaks, the lives of girls are ruined the most. Especially providing maintenance and inheritance rights similar to marriage. Clarifying the legal status of children born in cohabitation, especially about legitimacy and inheritance rights. After a relationship breaks, girls often take steps like suicide.
Due to the influence of globalization and exposure to Western culture, live-in relationships are now considered more acceptable. It raises questions on the moral consequences of cohabitation and traditional views of marriage and family. The lifestyle of Indian youth is changing rapidly. For this, they do not feel any hesitation in adopting modern culture, and live-in relationships are a style of modern culture. Today’s youth have started considering live-in relationships better than married life. Today’s generation considers marriage and live-in relationships to be the same. They believe that there is interference of society and law in marriage, but there is nothing like that in live-in relationships. Rather, there is complete freedom. But there is a difference between marriage and live-in relationships. This practice is as complicated as it seems easy. It has more disadvantages than its advantages. Such relationships are often seen in abundance in Western countries. Because the culture there easily accepts this practice. The lifestyle there is also similar. In India too, this system has received support for some years. The reason behind this can be attributed to the changing social views of some people living in metros, marriage problems, and issues related to religion. One section of the society considers it the biggest threat to Indian culture. On the other hand, the other section considers it a boon for living an independent life, looking at it as a change in the modern tradition. Everything has its own advantages and disadvantages.
The recently enacted Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code (UCC) established a series of comprehensive regulations for live-in partnerships, aimed at regulating them and guaranteeing their legal recognition. But these have also generated a lot of debate and raised concerns about government surveillance and privacy. Over the past 20 years, live-in relationships—in which couples live together without being married—have become more accepted in Indian society and law. In the past, Indian society was based on traditional values, and the only accepted form of committed relationship was marriage. Live-in partnerships were often stigmatized and viewed negatively by society. However, with the influence of globalization and exposure to Western culture, live-in relationships are now considered more acceptable. Using the right to life and personal liberty (Article S. Khushboo vs.), Indian courts have recognized live-in relationships in several judgments. According to Kanniammal (2010), live-in partnerships fall under the right to personal liberty. Sarma, Indra v. 3. K. V. Sarma (2013): It recognized live-in relationships resembling marriage under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDVA) and classified them into different types. The Chief Justice of India underlined that the freedom to choose a partner and form intimate relationships falls under Article 19(c) of the Constitution on free speech and expression.
The Protection Against Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDVA) protects women facing domestic violence in live-in relationships by including “relationships like marriage” within its ambit. In D. Velusamy vs. D. Pachaiyammal (2010), the Court ruled that only marriage-like relationships would qualify for legal protection under domestic violence laws. The Supreme Court has held in cases where children born out of live-in relationships will have the same inheritance rights as legally married parents. Live-in partnerships must be registered under the Uttarakhand UCC. This applies to both residents of Uttarakhand and those living outside India. Couples who decide to live together must register their relationship at the beginning and end under the UCC. If they wish to formally establish their relationship, they can bring along supporting documents such as a certificate from a religious leader confirming the couple’s eligibility for marriage, OTP linked to Aadhaar, and the registration fee. There are 74 types of relationships prohibited under the UCC Act, of which 37 are for men and 37 for women. Religious leaders or community leaders must give their approval to couples who fall into these categories of prohibited relationships. Registrars may refuse registration if they determine that the relationship violates public morals or customs.
According to Privacy Concerns (Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India), the right to privacy guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution is being blatantly violated, along with greater official surveillance over people’s private lives. Concerns have arisen about the new rules potentially creating disruptions in relations between castes and religions. Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and the PWDVA, 2005, currently allow women in live-in relationships to request maintenance; however, these rights are not inalienable. Legal disputes can arise from people who enter into such relationships without committing to them for a long time but later claim their legal rights. Especially in conservative communities, this raises questions about the moral implications of cohabitation and traditional views of marriage and family. Although the Uttarakhand UCC seeks to provide legal protection and recognition to live-in partnerships, it also raises important issues of privacy and government interference. To implement the new rules in a way that promotes social harmony and protects individual rights, it will be necessary to strike a balance between regulating relationships and preserving individual autonomy. If the Uniform Civil Code replaces personal laws, attention must be paid to guaranteeing women’s equality in cohabitation.
Barely 10% of live-in relationships reach the stage of marriage. In the remaining 90% of cases, the relationship breaks. Just like today’s young lovers propose as fast as they break up and then change their lovers as fast. Such lovers find the tempting practice of live-in relationships to be correct. Because they get a chance to live with each other like a husband and wife without marriage, and you understand the meaning of a husband-wife relationship very well. That is why after a relationship breaks, the lives of girls are ruined the most. Especially providing maintenance and inheritance rights similar to marriage. Clarifying the legal status of children born in cohabitation, especially with regard to legitimacy and inheritance rights. After a relationship breaks, girls often take steps like suicide.
