The petitioners submitted that they’ve been in a “live-in relationship”.
Chandigarh:
The Punjab and Haryana High courtroom has held {that a} man dwelling a “lustful and adulterous life” with a girl with out divorcing his partner can’t be referred to as a “live-in-relationship” or “relationship” within the nature of marriage.
The single choose bench of Justice Kuldeep Tiwari dismissed the petition of a pair from Punjab who had sought safety of their lives and liberty.
The petitioners submitted that they’ve been in a “live-in relationship” which has brought on grievance to the lady’s members of the family who’ve threatened to kill them.
During the listening to, the courtroom noticed the lady within the “live-in-relationship” was single whereas the person was married and had been dwelling individually from his spouse because of strained relations.
The man within the “live-in-relationship” has two kids together with his spouse they usually dwell with their mom.
“Without obtaining any valid decree of divorce from his earlier spouse and during the subsistence of his earlier marriage, the petitioner No.2 (man in live-in relationship) is living a lustful and adulterous life with the petitioner No.1 (woman in live-in relationship), which may constitute an offence punishable under Sections 494/495 of the IPC, as such a relationship does not fall within the phrase of ‘live-in relationship’ or ‘relationship’ in the nature of marriage,” the courtroom mentioned in its order.
The courtroom additionally discovered allegations of risk to life as “bald and vague.” “Neither any supportive material has been placed on record by the petitioners to corroborate their allegations, nor even any single instance pertaining to the manner and mode of alleged threats being extended to the petitioners has been anywhere disclosed,” the courtroom mentioned.
The courtroom additional said, “On the face of the above, it appears that in order to avoid any criminal prosecution in case of adultery, the present petition has been instituted. To the judicial mind of this Court, under the guise of invocation of the writ jurisdiction of this Court, the hidden intent of the petitioners is just to obliquely obtain the seal of this Court on their conduct.”
“This Court finds no concrete ground to grant the asked for relief(s), which are consequently negated. Therefore, the instant petition is hereby dismissed,” the courtroom mentioned.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV employees and is printed from a syndicated feed.)