The Supreme Court refused to interfere with convictions in a Chhattisgarh dowry death case, strongly criticising dowry harassment and humiliation of brides, while Justice BV Nagarathna emphasised that courts must send a strong societal message against financial coercion and mistreatment in matrimonial homes.
The Allahabad High Court held that although some schools of Muslim personal law allow marriage once a person attains puberty, this recognition cannot extend to a live-in relationship. The court clarified that such relationships remain outside recognised boundaries.
The Karnataka High Court quashed a bigamy case filed by wife against her 73-year-old husband and his live-in partner, concluding that their relationship could not attract the offence alleged. The Court remarked, “A mere live-in relationship does not amount to a marriage,”
The Allahabad High Court ruled that a married person cannot enter a live-in relationship without first obtaining a legal divorce. The court said personal liberty is not absolute, holding freedom ends where statutory rights of another person begin.
The High Court emphasized the need to address the societal implications of live-in relationships, stating, “It is high time we consider and establish a framework to uphold the moral values of society.” The court highlighted growing concerns over the impact of such relationships on traditional norms. It called for a collective effort to find solutions that balance individual freedoms with cultural ethics.
The Madras High Court annulled a 20-year-old woman’s marriage to her former teacher, citing coercion and lack of understanding during the signing of marriage papers. The court voided the registration, emphasizing the importance of consent and personal autonomy. The teacher agreed to end the marriage, allowing the woman to pursue her education.
