LIVING- IN RELATIONSHIP

Bollywood is mirroring in its films the ‘live-in’ relationships, a recent social phenomenon that is spreading in Indian society. Hindi movies like Fashion, Raaz, Salaam Namaste so on are all embedded with this theme.  Present society is forced to accept this arrangement amounting to an alternative to marriage due to fast spreading western culture.

Once upon a time, ‘living-in’ relationship was banned by the society.  Now, even the legal provisions are aiming to legalize such relationships. We see today vibrant mood among so-called social workers and politicians to debate on protecting the women folk from villainous male folk.  Women are protected against evil social practices like dowry, sathi, domestic violence, maintenance etc by legislations and commissions like National Commission for Women.

The ground realities today show that in majority of cases women folk abuse provisions of law to settle score with men folk in a mood of revenge. In the circumstances prevailing today, all concerned with the situations are mere helpless onlookers. ‘Living-in’ relation has caused embarrassment to the law-makers and the traditional families. 

Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code deals with adultery a situation that could be given birth to by extended friendship or ‘living-in’ relationship. This legal provision adjudicates a man who commits adultery liable for punishment of simple or rigorous imprisonment up to 5 years or with fine or both.  Here woman abettor is not punishable.  The aggrieved husband of woman can seek prosecution against the adulterous man.  Presumption of law is that woman is a property possessed by husband.

Parliamentarians are thinking loudly to amend the criminal law and implicate the adulterous woman too because the woman is an independent entity who can file a complaint if she is a victim or an offender if consented for the act.  It is to be seen what the view of the National Commission for Women would be to make a married woman an offender if she willingly cohabits with another man.  This Commission is supposed to protect the rights of a woman subject to adultery. 

Civilized societies elsewhere do not regard adultery as a crime but can be a ground for divorce. If Indian society also toes the same line, sanctity of women held high so far nosedives. It permits a married woman to desert her husband and children just like that to live with another man.  Marriage and all the grandeur attached to the institution of marriage would have no meaning.  One man – one woman theory would die.  On one hand bigamy is prohibited but on the other ‘live-in’ man and married woman are being recognized as ‘husband – wife’.  This results in the defeat of anti-bigamy laws.

In such an eventuality, whether adulterous woman become liable for alimony from second man lived with as also the first husband? This piquant situation has to be addressed by law now. 

The Malimath Committee has recommended that a woman living with a man like his wife for a reasonably long period be recognized as his wife and the term ‘wife’ in Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code be amended to include such a woman.

A recent Supreme Court judgment in Radhika Singh and Lola case held that ‘if a man and a woman live together and cohabit for a long spell as husband and wife, there is a presumption of valid marriage between the two’.  This implies that live-in relations have now acquired the status of marriage in India. 

But, the woman in subject is guilty of committing bigamy an offence under the bigamy prohibition law.  Confusion prevails whether the judgment should be treated as legal sanction to bear children outside marriage or whether judgment could be the basis of even a flat-mate seeking alimony.

By the judgment in the case of Radhika Singh and Loli it has become imperative that marriage, as an institution, has now become superfluous like civilized societies. 

A married woman’s concern for inheritance of property from ‘live-in’ situation is well supported by law. Any amendment to the existing law in the backdrop of the Supreme Court judgment is to be well debated before implemented.