Noting that a person below the age of 18 years is considered to be a child, a division bench comprising justice Vivek Kumar Birla and Rajendra Kumar-IV said “a child cannot have a live-in relationship and this would be an act not only immoral but also illegal”.
The petition was filed by the woman and her live-in partner, seeking quashing of the FIR lodged against the minor for kidnapping, with an additional prayer not to arrest the boy in the case.
Junking their plea, the bench, in its order dated July 11, said an accused who was below 18 years of age could not seek protection on the ground of having a live-in relationship with a major girl.
“In case this is permitted, this would amount to putting a premium on an illegal activity and thus would not be in the interest of our society, and we are not inclined to put a seal of approval on such legally impermissible activities,” the court further remarked.
The bench said although there is no law which prohibits live-in relationship, such relationship, by itself, has not been given “any protective umbrella under any law of the land, except that two major persons have right to live their own life and to that extent their personal liberty is to be protected”. However, in the present case, the boy is not a major, and cannot be permitted to have such a relationship, the court added.
The court also noted that under the Muslim law, live-in relationships are not permissible, and referred to a recent ruling of Allahabad high court in Kiran Rawat and Anr. v State of UP and Ors .
The court said anyone below 18 yrs is considered to be a child, and ‘a child cannot have a live-in relationship’
