The Allahabad High Court has granted interim protection to a live-in couple and held that no offence would be made out if a married man stays with an adult in a live-in relationship, with the consent of the woman.

The High Court rendered such findings while taking note of the couple’s apprehension of honour killing.

The Division Bench of Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena held, “There is no offence of the kind where a married man, staying with an adult in a live-in relationship, by consent of the other person, can be prosecuted for any offence, whatsoever. Morality and law have to be kept apart. If there is no offence under the law made out, social opinions and morality will not guide the action of the Court for protecting the rights of citizens.”

Advocate Brajesh Kumar represented the Petitioner, while Advocate Ajay Kumar Mishra represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The first and the second petitioner, who are adults, have been staying together in a live-in relationship. As per the First Information Report lodged by the mother of the woman, she is admittedly a major. However, the informant had stated that the first petitioner was taken away by blandishment by the second petitioner (a married man).

Arguments

It was the case of the caveator that the second petitioner is a married man, and thus it is an offence for him to stay with another woman.

Reasoning

The Bench was of the view that there is no offence if a married man stays with an adult in a live-in relationship, with the consent of the other person.

The Bench also took note of the fact that an application was made by the woman to the Superintendent of Police, Shahjahanpur, saying that she is an adult and staying of her free will with the man in a live-in relationship.

“It is reported that her parents and other family members are averse to the marriage and have threatened her with death, and both fear honour killing. Apparently, no action has been taken on this complaint by the Superintendent of Police. To protect two adults living together is the duty of the Police. Particular obligations in this regard are cast upon the Superintendent of Police, as held by the Supreme Court in Shakti Vahini v. Union of India and others, (2018)...”, the order read.

Thus, holding that a prima facie case was made out, the Bench directed that the petitioners would not be arrested until further orders of the Court.

The Bench concluded the matter by further restraining the family members from either causing harm to the parties in life or limb or contacting them by any means of communication. “The Superintendent of Police, Shahjahanpur shall be personally responsible to ensure the safety and security of the petitioners”, it ordered.

Cause Title: A v. State of U.P. and others (Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. - 3799 of 2026)

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocates Brajesh Kumar, Shahenshah Akhtar Khan

Respondent: Advocates Ajay Kumar Mishra, Government Advocate, Sharangpani Vikramdhar Dwivedi

Click here to read/download Order


Allahabad High CourtJustice JJ Munirtarun saxen

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.