In India, relationships and family structures have long been influenced by cultural traditions, religious values, and societal norms that emphasize the sanctity of marriage. Historically, marriage has been regarded not just as a union of two individuals but as a bond between families, orchestrated to ensure social harmony and adherence to established customs. This traditional framework has profoundly shaped the social fabric of the country, with marriage celebrated as a pivotal milestone in life. However, with globalization, urbanization, and increasing education levels, the younger generation is redefining companionship and commitment. Individual aspirations, career priorities, and the pursuit of autonomy have given rise to alternative relationship models, including live-in relationships—where couples cohabit without formalizing their union through marriage. These arrangements allow partners to assess compatibility before committing to a long-term partnership. While gaining traction in metropolitan areas, live-in relationships remain taboo in many regions of India, where societal norms continue to favor traditional marital structures.

The concept of live-in relationships is not entirely new, even within traditional societies. Marriage was seen as the cornerstone of familial and clan ties rather than a personal partnership between two individuals. Extramarital relationships have always existed but were often condemned, particularly for women, as indicative of low moral character. Men in positions of socio-economic or political power maintained concubines, reflecting patriarchal norms and the entrenched misogyny of male-dominated societies.

Hinduism offers a unique example of an alternative relationship model in Gandharva Vivah, a form of union based solely on mutual love and devoid of familial consent. Similarly, in Islamic tradition, Muta or “pleasure marriage” is a temporary contractual union practiced by some Muslim communities. Although controversial and rejected by Sunni Muslims, it reflects the complexities of gender and power dynamics in relationships. During the colonial era, Victorian morality reinforced conservative attitudes toward relationships, stigmatizing any union outside marriage. Following independence, urbanization and globalization began to challenge these norms, particularly in metropolitan areas. Yet, non-marital unions, including live-in relationships, continued to face societal resistance, with marriage remaining the only legitimate framework for relationships.

Globally, the acceptance of live-in relationships varies widely. Countries such as Sweden, France, and Canada have progressive legal frameworks that protect the rights of cohabiting couples, reflecting an emphasis on personal freedom and evolving family structures. Conversely, many culturally or religiously conservative nations view live-in arrangements as morally and socially unacceptable, leading to their marginalization. India’s unique position in this global discourse reflects its diverse cultural landscape and traditional values. While societal acceptance of live-in relationships is gradually increasing, particularly in urban areas, significant challenges persist, ranging from legal ambiguities to societal stigma.

The Indian judiciary has taken significant steps toward recognizing live-in relationships. In S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal (2010), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of live-in relationships under Article 21 of the Constitution, affirming that cohabitation between consenting adults is not illegal. Additionally, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, acknowledges “relationships akin to marriage” and extends protection to women in such arrangements. This legal stance was further reinforced in Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma (2013), where the court ruled that women in live-in relationships resembling marriage are entitled to protection under the Act.

The issue of financial support, particularly maintenance for women in live-in relationships, has also been a subject of legal and legislative scrutiny. The Justice Mallimath Committee (2000) recommended amending Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) to grant maintenance rights to women in live-in relationships. Similarly, the Maharashtra Government (2008) and the National Commission for Women (2008) proposed recognizing women in long-term cohabiting relationships as spouses, ensuring their legal protection and rights. In D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal (2010), the Supreme Court ruled that women in live-in relationships resembling marriage can claim maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC. Furthermore, in Revanasiddappa v. Mallikarjun (2011), the court clarified that children born out of live-in relationships are legitimate and entitled to inherit property under Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Despite these progressive judicial interventions, live-in relationships in India face several challenges. The absence of a uniform legal framework creates ambiguities regarding the rights and responsibilities of individuals in such arrangements. Issues like maintenance, property rights, and inheritance remain unclear, often leaving women particularly vulnerable. Social and religious opposition further complicates matters, as many communities view live-in relationships as morally unacceptable, creating legal and societal hurdles. The tragic Aftab- Shraddha Walker, 2022 case, where a live-in relationship ended in a horrific crime, underscores the potential vulnerabilities and the need for stronger protections. Additionally, increasing allegations of “love jihad” further fuel societal opposition and mistrust, amplifying stigma around such relationships. Gendered vulnerabilities are another pressing concern, with women disproportionately affected by financial dependence, abandonment, and inadequate legal safeguards, making them susceptible to exploitation. To address the increasing number of cases involving sexual intercourse obtained through deceitful means, including false promises of marriage, the government has criminalized such acts under Section 69 of the BNS Act, 2023. However, this provision has faced criticism for its potential misuse, as some women have allegedly invoked it in situations where marriages could not be performed due to reasonable causes, subjecting men to stringent legal consequences. Moreover, while the Supreme Court has decriminalized and legitimized live-in relationships, societal stigma continues to prevail, posing emotional, social, and practical challenges for couples in such arrangements.

Addressing these challenges requires a multi-pronged approach. First, India must enact a comprehensive legal framework to define the rights, responsibilities, and safeguards for individuals in live-in relationships. This framework should address issues such as maintenance, inheritance, and the rights of children born out of such unions, ensuring clarity and protection. Second, ensuring financial security for women is critical. Strengthened provisions for maintenance, equitable distribution of shared assets, and financial rights can prevent abandonment and exploitation. Third, public awareness campaigns are necessary to challenge misconceptions and reduce societal stigma surrounding live-in relationships, fostering greater acceptance. Finally, legal frameworks must prioritize privacy and individual autonomy, ensuring that recognition of live-in relationships is balanced with the protection of personal freedoms. By adopting these measures, India can harmonize traditional values with modern realities, creating a legal and social environment that respects individual choices while addressing the evolving dynamics of relationships.