Punjab & Haryana High Court: Live-In Relationship Of Minor Cannot Be Indirectly Sanctioned By Judicial Imprimatur

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that Courts cannot indirectly sanction minor's live-in-relationship through judicial imprimatur.

The Court was considering a Petition filed by a couple seeking police protection.

The single bench of Justice Sumeet Goyal observed, "Any judicial imprimatur that indirectly sanctions a minor’s involvement in such a relationship would not only be antithetical to the legislative intent but would also undermine the very bulwark erected to preserve the sanctity of youthful innocence. Thus, the Court, while exercising its protective jurisdiction, must tread with measured caution, ensuring that its decree does not, even by implication, countenance that which the law expressly deprecates."

The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Prince Sharma.

Facts of the Case

Counsel for the Petitioners argued that the Petitioners are well known to each other since a long time and are in a relationship at the moment. Earlier, both the Petitioners were engaged with each other with the consent of their respective families but the family of Petitioner No.2, later on, broke the engagement as the father of Petitioner No.2 intended to get her married to a man, elder offered to take Petitioner No.2 abroad after marriage. The Counsel further iterated that the Petitioners have faced the wrath of their families on account of their live-in-relationship and, and liberty at the hands of private Respondents has been entreated for.

Reasoning By Court

The Court at the outset stated that in adjudicating upon a Petition for protection wherein minors are involved in a live-in-relationship, the Court must remain mindful of the fact that the paramount consideration remains the welfare and well being of the minor in question.

"To extend the mantle of protection in such circumstances would, in effect, constitute an implicit approbation of a live arrangement involving minors, a proposition repugnant to the statutory framework designed to shield the young and impressionable from exploitation and moral peril. The law, in its sagacity, has circumscribed the liberties of minors, recognizing their tender age and the consequential susceptibility to undue influence and imprudent choices. By legislative fiat, provisions exist to interdict any form of abuse or impropriety that might arise from the unfettered discretion of those yet to attain the full facilities of maturity," the Court observed.

The Court noted that the girl was a minor at the time of filing of the Petition and thereby directed the Police to take requisite steps in accordance with law.

The Petition was accordingly dismissed.

Cause Title: Arshdeep Singh and Another vs. State of Punjab and Others (2025:PHHC:042017)

Click here to read/ download Order