Add Tribune As Your Trusted Source
TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | ChinaUnited StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My Money
News Columns | Straight DriveCanada CallingLondon LetterKashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHimachal CallingHill ViewBenchmark
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Adults can be in live-in relationship even without attaining marriageable age: Rajasthan HC

Justice Anoop Dhand delivers the judgement while hearing a plea for protection filed by an 18-year-old woman and a 19-year-old man from Kota
Photo for representational purpose only. iStock

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that two consenting adults are entitled to be in a live-in relationship even if they have not yet reached the legal age for marriage, underscoring that constitutional rights cannot be curtailed on that ground.

Advertisement

Justice Anoop Dhand delivered the judgement while hearing a plea for protection filed by an 18-year-old woman and a 19-year-old man from Kota, who told the court that they were living together out of free will.

Advertisement

The couple told the court that they had executed a live-in agreement on October 27, 2025.

The petitioners alleged that the woman’s family opposed the relationship and had threatened to kill them, and that their complaint to the Kota police went unaddressed.

Opposing the petition, public prosecutor Vivek Choudhary argued that because the man had not attained 21 years — the minimum legal age for marriage for men — he should not be permitted to be in a live-in arrangement.

Advertisement

The court dismissed the argument, saying the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be denied merely because the petitioners are not of marriageable age.

“The state has a constitutional obligation to safeguard the life and liberty of every individual,” the judge observed, adding that live-in relationships are not prohibited or criminalised under Indian law.

Justice Dhand directed the superintendents of police of Bhilwara and Jodhpur (rural) to verify the facts stated in the petition, assess the threat perception, and ensure necessary protection to the couple if required.

Advertisement
Tags :
#ConsentAdults#CoupleProtection#FreedomToLive#LegalAge#LiveInRelationship#RelationshipProtectionArticle21ConstitutionalRightsindialawRajasthanHighCourt
Show comments
Advertisement