The Allahabad High Court ruled on 19 December 2025 that a married person cannot legally enter a live-in relationship without dissolving their marriage through divorce, as it infringes on the statutory rights of the existing spouse and contravenes social norms.
Justice Vivek Kumar Singh made this observation while dismissing a protection plea filed by a married petitioner from Uttar Pradesh and his partner, who sought police safeguards against alleged threats from the man’s family.
The case stemmed from an FIR lodged by the wife under relevant Indian Penal Code sections, including those related to criminal intimidation, amid claims of a prolonged relationship.
Perspectives vary: the court prioritised the wife’s marital rights, the couple argued for personal liberty under Article 21, and no official statements from police or government emerged.
This aligns with parallel Bombay High Court remarks on 19 December, amid over 1.5 lakh pending divorce cases nationwide per National Judicial Data Grid data, with no latest appeals reported.
Judicial Stand on Balancing Liberty and Law
Justice Vivek Kumar Singh articulated a firm stance, declaring that “the freedom of one person extinguishes where the statutory right of another person starts,” rejecting the couple’s plea for protection and directing them to pursue divorce in family court if desired.
This ruling humanises the plight of the spouse and children, often left in emotional and financial uncertainty, as seen in the petitioner’s case where the man’s subsisting marriage and family were central.
Vital statistics paint a broader picture: India’s divorce rate has risen 30% in urban areas over the past decade, per government reports, yet court backlogs exceeding 1.5 lakh cases delay resolutions, forcing many into legal limbo.
The bench drew on the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which deems marriages indissoluble without formal proceedings, emphasising that live-in arrangements lack legal recognition when a valid union persists.
Such observations echo the human cost, with families reporting distress from “parallel relationships,” as evidenced by rising FIRs under IPC provisions despite adultery’s 2018 decriminalisation.
Historical Precedents Shaping Modern Rulings
This verdict builds on a nuanced legal evolution, contrasting with the Supreme Court’s progressive affirmations of live-in relationships for unmarried consenting adults as part of the right to life under Article 21, notably post the 2018 Joseph Shine case that struck down adultery as a crime.
Earlier, the 2023 Supreme Court ruling in similar matters protected unmarried couples from harassment, yet explicitly distinguished them from cases involving subsisting marriages. In the Allahabad instance, the couple’s decade-long association was deemed irrelevant without marital dissolution, following incidents like the wife’s FIR that escalated family tensions.
Broader context includes recent Bombay High Court comments on 19 December 2025, where justices GS Kulkarni and Firdosh Pooniwalla dismissed a Thane man’s plea, warning that such ties “destroy the institution of marriage.”
Complementary rulings, such as a 16 December Allahabad decision denying maintenance under CrPC Section 125 to women cohabiting with married men, reinforce that first marriages hold precedence.
These developments navigate India’s diverse social fabric, where cultural emphasis on family cohesion clashes with urban shifts toward individualism, amid over 4.7 crore pending cases across district judiciary as per 2025 judicial statistics.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
At The Logical Indian, we uphold peace, dialogue, kindness, empathy, harmony, and coexistence as cornerstones of a just society, viewing this ruling as a measured call for accountability in relationships that honour all stakeholders spouses, partners, and children alike.
While personal freedoms merit protection, legal clarity like this prevents the erosion of trust that fractures families, encouraging structured paths to separation through counselling and swift judicial processes rather than unchecked pursuits. It fosters positive social change by prioritising empathy for those impacted, urging communities to build support systems like accessible family courts and mediation centres.
