Allahabad HC: Difficult For Woman To Live Alone After Breaking Of Live-In Relationships

The Allahabad High Court recently observed that it is difficult for a woman to live alone after a live-in relationship ends because Indian society does not accept and recognize such relationships.

The Court was hearing a bail plea of a man who had been arrested for failing to fulfil his promise to marry his live-in partner.

Justice Siddharth noted while granting bail to the man that in such a situation, the woman in a live-in relationship has no choice but to file a case against her live-in partner.

The order stated, “This is one case where the disastrous consequences of a live-in relationship have emerged. It is difficult for a woman to live alone after breaking of live-in relationship. The Indian Society as a whole does not consider such a relationship to be acceptable. As a result, the woman has no choice but to file an FIR against her live-in partner, like in present case.”

According to the prosecution, the couple had been in a live-in relationship for more than a year. She had previously been married to another man, with whom she had two sons. She later became pregnant as a result of sexual relations she had with the accused while they were living together. However, the accused refused to marry her.

The woman claimed that the accused then sent obscene photographs of her to her ex-husband, after which he also refused to live with her.

As a result, she filed a complaint, and an FIR was filed against the accused under Sections 376 (rape) and 406 (criminal breach of trust) of the IPC.

Advocates Anuj Srivastava and Tanmay Sadh, appearing on behalf of the accused, submitted that the woman willingly entered into a live-in relationship with the accused. They further stated that she was capable of understanding the consequences of such a relationship and that there was no allegation that the relationship began with the promise of marriage.

It was further argued that the accused has been falsely implicated in this case, has been in jail since November 22 last year and has no criminal history to his credit.

Given the nature of the offence, the evidence, the accused’s complicity, the submissions of the parties’ counsel, the one-sided investigation by the police, and other factors, the Court granted bail to the man.