- By Priyanka Koul
- Mon, 27 Apr 2026 02:27 PM (IST)
- Source:JND
- "She went on to have a child with the man without marriage, and now she is saying rape and assault. What is this?," the judge asked.
- The judge questioned why she chose to live with the man and have a child without getting married first
- However, the top court also noted that the woman is entitled to claim maintenance for the child.
The Supreme Court has observed that ending a live-in relationship, by itself, cannot be treated as a criminal offence, while underlining the legal complications that may arise in such arrangements outside marriage.
The remarks came from Justice BV Nagarathna while hearing a plea filed by a woman who alleged rape and assault by a man on the basis of a false promise of marriage. The court drew a distinction between consensual cohabitation and offences involving sexual assault.
Justice Nagarathna observed that when two adults willingly enter into a live-in relationship, certain personal and legal risks are naturally involved.
"This is a live-in relationship. She went on to have a child with the man without marriage, and now she is saying rape and assault. What is this?" the judge said, questioning how a consensual relationship later escalated into allegations of sexual violence.
She also noted that while such comments are sometimes viewed as “victim-shaming”, the question of consent remains crucial in determining criminal liability. "Where is the question of offence when there is a consensual relationship?" she asked.
"This is what happens in live-in relationships. For years, they lived together. When they split up, the lady files a complaint against the man for sexual assault. These are all the vagaries of relationships outside marriage," Justice Nagarathna further remarked.
During the hearing, the petitioner’s lawyer argued that the accused had met the woman when she was 18 and had assured her of marriage. It was also claimed that he was already married at the time, a fact allegedly not known to the woman.
The court questioned why the woman continued the relationship and had a child without formal marriage. When it was submitted that the accused had allegedly behaved similarly with others, the bench said it would focus only on the facts of the present case.
While expressing sympathy for the woman, the court noted that she is entitled to claim maintenance for the child. However, it clarified that the breakdown of a live-in relationship cannot, in itself, form the basis of a criminal case.
"There can be an illegitimate relationship, but the child (born from such a marriage) cannot be illegitimate. If there were a marriage, then her rights would have been better," the judge observed. The Supreme Court also suggested that the matter be resolved through mediation between the parties.