In a judgment delivered on September 13, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that moral wrongdoing from the societal perspective and legal criminal wrongdoings are two separate issues, and though some in society may heavily be critical of a live-in relationship between two married individuals, many others may not.
“Live-in relationship between two consenting married adults, who are married to different partners, has not been made criminal or legislated against. While concluding that legal enforcement of morals has not been legislated against, and cannot be a subject matter of any legal morality preached through a judgment (sic),” the Court said.
Hence, though judges might have their own views regarding such relationships, they cannot attach criminality to such acts based on their perceived notions of morality, the Court emphasised.
“It would be a dangerous proposition to attach criminality to acts that have not been legislated against on the basis of perceived morality. Judges, as individuals, may have different notions of morality, which cannot be imposed on any party,” the single-judge stated.
Pertinently, the Court ruled that when a woman is not legally eligible to marry someone due to her existing marriage to another person, she cannot allege rape by claiming that she was induced into a sexual relationship under the false pretext of marriage.
“The protection and remedies available under Section 376 of the IPC cannot be extended to a victim who was not legally entitled to marry the person with whom she was in sexual relationship with. A case can be made out under Section 376 of IPC, if the victim can prove that she was induced into a sexual relationship under false pretext of marriage by the other party being legally eligible to enter into a marriage with such person,” the Court underscored.
It opined that individual adults are free to make decisions even though such decisions might not align with societal norms or expectations. However, in such cases, they have to remain ready to face potential consequences of such relationships, the Court said.
Source: Barandbench
