Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     When Two Accused Face Identical Charges, One Cannot Be Convicted While the Other is Acquitted: Supreme Court Emphasizes Principle of Parity in Acquittal    |     Supreme Court Limits Interim Protection for Financial Institutions, Modifies Order on FIRs Filed by Borrowers    |     Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail in Methamphetamine Case After Delay in Chemical Analysis Report    |     No Sign of Recent Intercourse; No Injury Was Found On Her Body Or Private Parts: Gauhati High Court Acquits Two In Gang Rape Case    |     Failure to Disclose Relationship with Key Stakeholder Led to Setting Aside of Arbitral Award: Gujarat High Court    |     Strict Compliance with UAPA's 7-Day Timeline for Sanctions is Essential:  Supreme Court    |     PAT Teachers Entitled to Regularization from 2014, Quashes Prospective Regularization as Arbitrary: Himachal Pradesh High Court    |     Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Anonymity Protections for Victims in Sensitive Cases: Right to Privacy Prevails Over Right to Information    |     Certified Copy of Will Admissible Under Registration Act, 1908: Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea for Production of Original Will    |     Injuries on Non-Vital Parts Do Not Warrant Conviction for Attempt to Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC    |     Classification Based on Wikipedia Data Inadmissible; Tribunal to Reassess Using Actual Financial Records: PH High Court Orders Reconsideration of Wage Dispute    |     Mere Delay in Initiation Does Not Justify Reduction of Damages: Jharkhand High Court on Provident Fund Defaults    |     Legatee Can Continue Suit Without Probate, But Decree Contingent on Probate Approval: Orissa High Court    |     An Award that Shocks the Conscience of the Court Cannot Stand, Especially When Public Money is Involved: Calcutta HC Reduces Quantum by Half    |     Trademark Transaction Within Territoriality Principle Subject to Indian Tax Laws: Bombay High Court Dismisses Hindustan Unilever's Petition on Non-Deduction of TDS    |     Concealment of Material Facts Bars Relief under Article 226: SC Reprimands Petitioners for Lack of Bonafides    |     Without Determination of the Will's Genuineness, Partition is Impossible: Supreme Court on Liberal Approach to Pleading Amendments    |     Candidates Cannot Challenge a Selection Process After Participating Without Protest : Delhi High Court Upholds ISRO's Administrative Officer Recruitment    |    

Live -In – Relationship: Protection of life and liberty is a basic feature of the Constitution of India: P&H HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a groundbreaking judgment, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana affirmed the constitutional right to life and liberty for individuals in live-in relationships, setting a significant precedent in the realm of personal law and individual rights.

The case, titled Kiran Kaur and another vs. State of Punjab and others, was presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi. The court meticulously addressed the petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking protection for the life and liberty of the petitioners, who are in a live-in relationship and facing threats from relatives.

Constitutional Sanctity to Personal Choices: The court emphasized, “Every person, moreso, a major, has the right to live his/her life with a person of his/her choice subject to the law as applicable.” This assertion highlights the court’s recognition of personal autonomy in intimate relationships.

Legal Precedence on Live-in Relationships: Citing previous judgments, the court acknowledged the growing acceptance and legal validation of live-in relationships in India. Justice Bedi noted, “The concept of live-in-relationships has crept into our society from western nations...this shows that social acceptance for live-in-relationships is on the increase.”

Protection of Life and Liberty: The judgment focused on the importance of safeguarding the life and liberty of individuals, stating, “The protection of life and liberty is a basic feature of the Constitution of India.”

Non-Intrusion into Legality of Relationship: The court deliberately refrained from commenting on the legality of the relationship between the petitioners, underscoring that the immediate concern was their protection.

The court directed the police to assess the threat perception to the petitioners and take appropriate action in accordance with the law. This direction reflects a balanced approach, safeguarding the petitioners’ rights while not precluding legal action against them for any unlawful activities.

Date of Decision: 29.11.2023

Kiran Kaur and another VS State of Punjab and others 

Similar News