By Admin 
The recent decisions of Allahabad High Court regarding live-in relationships of married men have given a new direction to the legal and social debate. Two different decisions within just a few days have raised the question as to where the boundary between law and morality lies.
In fact, this matter is not just about a relationship but has become a matter of personal freedom, marital rights and conflict of social beliefs. For this reason, both the decisions put forward different interpretations, which have now become the center of discussion.
First decision: Married man did not get relief
On March 20, the single bench took a strict stand and said that no married person can live in a live-in relationship with a third person without obtaining divorce. The court also made it clear that personal freedom is not unlimited, rather it is bound by the rights of others.
The bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Singh said that the husband or wife has the statutory right to live with their spouse. In such a situation, if a person ignores this right and lives in a live-in relationship, it will be considered a violation of the rights of the other party and the court cannot give protection to such a relationship.
Second decision: Relationship not considered a crime
On March 25, just five days after the first judgment, the Division Bench took a completely different view in a different case. The bench of Justice JJ Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena said that if a married man is living in a live-in relationship with an adult woman with her consent, then it cannot be considered an offense under the law.
The court also added that the moral beliefs of the society and personal opinions cannot influence the decisions of the court. Unless an act is made a crime in law, action cannot be taken on moral grounds alone.
Law vs morality: debate intensifies
In this case, the woman said in her application to the police that she is living in a live-in relationship of her own free will, but there is a threat to her life from her family. Citing Supreme Court’s Shakti Vahini vs Union of India decision, the court directed the police to ensure the safety of both.
Additionally, the court also said that it is the responsibility of the state to protect the life and liberty of two adults. These contradictory decisions have made it clear that there are differing views even within the law on sensitive issues like live-in relationships, and there is a need for more clear guidance on this topic in the future.