The Supreme Court delivered a stark reminder on the vulnerabilities of live-in relationships, questioning a rape accusation lodged after 15 years of cohabitation and the birth of a child. Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjwal Bhuyan bench grilled the feasibility of such claims in consensual, decade-and-a-half-long partnerships.
Hailing from Madhya Pradesh, the dispute saw the woman charge her partner with deception—allegedly hiding his marital status to initiate intimacy. Invoking BNS sections on sexual misconduct and fraud, she sought justice. The High Court dismissed her FIR, leading to a Supreme Court challenge.
‘Consensual relations over 15 years with a child involved don’t morph into rape,’ Justice Nagarathna remarked sharply. The court delineated that live-in setups, unlike marriages, offer no statutory stability; terminations are civil matters, not crimes.
Shifting focus to family welfare, the bench urged prioritizing child maintenance over incarceration quests. ‘Secure sustenance for the offspring through legal maintenance channels,’ they counseled, affirming a child’s entitlements supersede vindictive pursuits.
This pronouncement delineates clear lines: enduring mutual bonds can’t be criminalized retrospectively. It prompts a broader discourse on evolving relationship norms, urging awareness of legal pitfalls in unmarried unions amid rising live-in trends across urban India.
