‘Can’t live-in while married’ — HC dismisses man’s writ petition for production of ‘detained’ partner

An Andhra man claimed his partner was ‘illegally detained’ by her family. Andhra Pradesh HC, however, dismissed his petition on the ground that he was still married to another woman.

A representational photo of Andhra High Court | Photo: aphc.gov.in

New Delhi: Choice to live outside wedlock doesn’t mean married people are free to be in a live-in relationship while their marriage subsists, the Andhra Pradesh High Court said last week, dismissing a writ petition by a man who wants his live-in partner to be released from her parents’ custody.  

A division Bench of Justices Ravi Nath Tilhari and B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi was hearing a habeas corpus petition by a man who claimed that his partner, a major in the eyes of the law, had been illegally detained by her parents. 

Habeas corpus is a recourse available in cases of illegal detention. Under this, the court directs that the person so detained be brought before them. 

Dismissing the petition, the court said it was not inclined to grant the petitioner’s request because he was still married and that such an order would “transgress the valid legal framework”.

“The right to live out of wedlock is to be understood (as) living without solemnising marriage if they are major,” the court said in its order. “They are not bound to marry each other. But, that does not mean living in live-in relationship with others, outside wedlock, during continuance of marriage”.

The court also found no merit in the petitioner’s claim that “it is a case of violation of one’s fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, or of any illegal custody” by his partner’s father, a respondent in the case.  

“A Writ of Habeas Corpus cannot be issued in a routine manner for production of corpus of a person in court. Reasonable grounds must be shown. Though it is a writ of right, it is not a writ of course,” the court held, dismissing the petition.

This decision comes at a time when the Punjab & Haryana High Court have given an identical ruling, imposing fine on another set of married individuals who sought police protection for a live-in relationship. That court, too, saw this as an attempt to “transgress” the legal framework.

Also Read: Husband & wife closely related, Delhi HC declares 31-yr marriage void under Hindu law

‘Out of legal framework’

In his petition, the petitioner had invoked his constitutional right to live with his partner. He also claimed that on 27 July this year, his partner’s father and some 20 people had forcibly taken her away after some verbal abuse.

His partner has since been illegally detained by her parents, he alleged. The petitioner had also claimed that he had filed for divorce. 

The court, however, turned down his arguments saying that the petitioner wasn’t divorced yet and while still being in a marriage recognised by the law, one cannot claim protection to be in a live-in relationship. 

The court relied on Allahabad High Court’s 2020 ruling in Kiran Rawat and another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh to support its stand. In that case, petitioners, who were in a live-in relationship, claimed they were being harassed by the local police and sought the court’s protection.

However, the Allahabad HC had declined to interfere on the ground that the couple were not married.

“In the present case, for the fact as disclosed in the writ petition, the petitioner is already married to another woman. The marriage is subsisting…Filing of the writ petition appears to us to be a device adopted to have a seal and signature of this Court on the illegal act of the petitioner, transgressing the valid legal framework of his marriage,” the Andhra HC said in its order last week, adding that it was not inclined to invoke the writ and “expose” his partner to the public “on such bald allegations and out of legal framework”.

Akshat Jain is a student of the National Law University, Delhi, and an intern with ThePrint

(Edited by Uttara Ramaswamy)