Married Muslim man can’t claim rights to live-in relationship with Hindu woman
The court noted that this constitutional provision does not provide blanket support to relationships that go against traditional customs
On Wednesday, the Lucknow division of the Allahabad High Court stated that Muslims who are currently married cannot have rights in a live-in relationship based on Islamic principles. This declaration came during the court’s review of a legal request from Sneha Devi and Mohd Shadab Khan, who sought legal protection against police intervention following a kidnapping accusation by the woman’s family against Khan. The court instructed that Sneha Devi be returned to her family’s care.
Details of the Court Case
The couple informed the court that they are living together without being legally married. They argued that their adult status and the Supreme Court’s recognition of their right to live-in without being married should entitle them to legal protection. The couple stated that their relationship has been ongoing for a significant period and they have been sharing their lives, finances, and responsibilities as a couple. They further requested the court to safeguard their rights as a live-in couple and provide them with the necessary legal protection. However, the court refused to provide a ruling on their protection, noting that Islamic law does not recognize live-in arrangements for those who are already married, though the situation might differ for unmarried individuals.
Upon further investigation, it was revealed that Khan had a prior marriage with Farida Khatoon in 2020, and they shared a child. The court emphasized the need for a balance between constitutional and societal norms regarding marriage, warning that a lack of balance could disrupt societal harmony. The court also ordered that Sneha Devi be escorted to her parents by the police.
The couple had cited Article 21, which guarantees protection of life and personal liberty, in their case. However, the court noted that this constitutional provision does not provide blanket support to relationships that go against traditional customs and practices, especially those between people of different religions. The judges concluded that the couple did not meet the criteria for constitutional protection under Article 21.
