Supreme Court Sympathizes But Declines Criminal Action in 15-Year Live-in Relationship Case

NEW DELHI: While sympathising with women whose live-in partners have walked out of the relationship, Supreme Court on Monday said courts could not do much as ending a consensual relationship was not an offence. Hearing the plea of a woman who was in a live-in relationship for 15 years, but whose partner married someone else despite a child being born to them, a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan said it could not allow her plea for a criminal case of sexual harassment and exploitation against him, as it was a consensual relationship. "There was a consensual relationship and a child was born. Once he walks out, it is not a criminal offence. Where is the question of an offence when the relationship was consensual?" the bench said. The court said there was no legal binding in such a relationship and that people should be careful about the vagaries of live-in relationships. "Why did she go and live with him before marriage? They could have married. Now she is saying sexual assault," the bench told her lawyer. The woman's counsel said she was an 18year-old widow when she came in contact with the man, and that she was forced into a physical relationship on the false promise of marriage. She told the bench that the man had marriedfour times. Refusing to go into his alleged misdeeds, the bench said, "We can only sympathise with your client; she got fooled or whatever. She went with him, had a child, and lived with himfor 15 years." The bench said she could seek maintenance from the man for her eight-year-old child, as he was born out of that relationship. As her lawyer urged the court that mediation could be opted for to seek maintenance, the bench issued notice on that limited issue.