The Punjab and Haryana high court has made it clear that the “live-in-relationship is morally or socially not acceptable.”
Justice H S Madaan passed these orders while dismissing the petition filed by a runaway couple from Punjab’s Tarn Taran district seeking protection of their life and liberty. The couple, in this case, was in a “live-in” relationship.
The petitioner couple, Gulza Kumari and Gurwinder Singh had filed the petition stating that presently they are residing together and intend to get married shortly. They were apprehensive about the danger to their lives from the parents of the girl.
“As a matter of fact, the petitioners in the garb of filing the present petition are seeking seal of approval on their live-in-relationship, which is morally and socially not acceptable and no protection order in the petition can be passed. The petition stands dismissed accordingly,” Justice Madaan wrote in his order released last week.
The counsel for the petitioner, advocate J S Thakur said the girl was 19 years old and the boy was 22 years old, and both wanted to marry each other. Due to some documents like the Aadhar card being in possession of the girl’s family, the couple could not get married.
“As the Supreme Court (SC) has already upheld the live-in relationship, we had approached the HC seeking directions to protect their life and liberty till they get married. As of now, they were in a live-in relationship to avoid the wrath of the girl’s family that was against their relationship,” advocate Thakur added without commenting on the HC observations.
Importantly, another bench of the HC had recently held that if directions for protection of a runaway couple in a “live-in relationship,” are granted, the “social fabric of the society would get disturbed.”
“Petitioner No 1 (girl) is barely 18 years old whereas petitioner No 2 (boy) is 21 years old. They claim to be residing together in a live-in relationship and claim protection of their life and liberty from the girl’s relatives. In the considered view of this bench, if such protection as claimed is granted, the entire social fabric of the society would get disturbed,” the HC bench had observed while refusing to grant any protection to the couple.
The couple, in that case, Ujjawal (girl) and the boy, Manpreet had claimed to be in a “live-in relationship” without marrying each other and wanted the HC to protect their life from the girl’s family. The order, however, had sparked outrage among the lawyers and the civil rights activists, who had been arguing that the SC had already recognized live-in relationships.
Read Order here: