The Supreme Court refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) petition on Monday that sought directions to the Central government to formulate guidelines for the registration of live-in relationships and social security of citizens entering in such partnerships.
The order was passed by the Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice J.B. Pardiwala, which termed the petition as ‘misconceived’ and also questioned the intent of the petitioner.
Calling it a ‘hare-brained’ plea the CJI asked the petitioner whether she was you trying to foster the security of these people or not letting people enter in such relationships.
Observing that costs should be imposed on such petitions, the CJI dismissed the plea.
Filed by Advocate Mamta Rani, the petition sought social equality and security for those in live-in relationships.
It contended that the courts had always worked for giving protection to all citizens of the country, including live-in partners, and passed numerous judgments that protected the members of live-in partnership, be it women, men or children born out of such relationships.
The plea said the failure to register live-in partnerships violated the constitutional rights to live freely (Article 19) and the right to protection of life (Article 21) and personal liberty.
It further sought framing laws to govern live-in relationships and directions to the Central government on creating a database regarding the exact number of people who were in live-in relationships across the country.
The petitioner contended that this could only be achieved by making registration of live-in partnerships compulsory.
As per the plea, there has been a vast increase in crimes committed by live-in partners, including major crimes like rape and murder, due to the absence of rules and guidelines covering such partnerships.
(Case tile: Mamta Rani vs Union of India)