Home / Volume 8, Issue 4 / Analysis of the New Trend of Live-in Relationship… Open access · CC BY-NC 4.0
Research Paper Volume 8 Issue 4 1025 - 1039 July 26, 2025

Analysis of the New Trend of Live-in Relationship in India

Lead author · Corresponding
Dr. Nitya Nand Pandey
Professor at Singhania University, Pacheri Bari, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, India
Co-author
Mohammed K. Ujjainwala
Research Scholar at Singhania University, Pacheri Bari, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, India
View PDF Full text DOIhttps://doij.org/10.10000/IJLMH.1110398
Abstract

One of the foremost significant societal structures in India, marriage has several customs and ceremonies. Marriage is regarded as a sacramental institution that validates a relationship between a man and a woman. Following the British invasion, Indian society largely adopted Western culture, which includes the idea of "live-in" partnerships, in which men and women live together without the formality of marriage. In ancient India, a marriage known as a Gandharva marriage occurred in which the bride and groom, based on mutual agreement, lived together without the approval of their parents or elders, despite the fact that live-in relationships look like a strange idea in India. The invasion of other rulers and certain people's moral preferences for their mates caused these marriages to gradually decrease. This custom has been given a new name in contemporary society: live-in relationships. Families changed as a result of the demographic shift and the advancement of education. Many people wait to get married until they are financially secure and have the education they want. They typically live together to see how well the two people get along, and living together is seen as a sign of finding a compatible mate. Live-in partnerships have significantly increased in India as a result of the economic liberalization brought forth by Western media. Following the capitalism era, when everyone's interests were prioritized, there was a rise in individualism. As a result, people began to focus on marriage as a way to choose their spouses and determine whether they were compatible. A domestic partnership is not illegal in India. Many societal groups do not embrace it because they believe it could lead to more adultery. Live-in relationships are not specifically covered by any laws, but numerous rulings have endorsed them in the absence of legislation. By means of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act of 2005, the Honourable Courts safeguarded the rights of women and children. Every citizen has the unalienable basic right to marry, as stated in Article 21 of the Constitution. Both marriage and cohabitation are possible. They have a choice. According to Section 125 of the 1973 Criminal Procedure Code, a woman from a marriage-like union is likewise entitled to support. In live-in relationships, the partners deal with a number of problems, such as a lack of social acceptance, the absence of official documentation indicating live-in status, and caste and religious connection complications. The live-in relationship as an alternative to marriage was not acceptable in Indian society. The rise in live-in relationships and how society views them are the main topics of this article, which makes the case for the necessity of a distinct and secular legal framework for cohabitating partners. Through empirical study, the author also attempts to learn how individuals view cohabitation.

Type
Research Paper
Information
International Journal of Law Management and Humanities, Volume 8, Issue 4, Page 1025 - 1039
DOI: https://doij.org/10.10000/IJLMH.1110398
Creative Commons
CC BY-NC 4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits remixing, adapting, and building upon the work for non-commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © IJLMH 2026
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this manuscript are those of the author(s) alone and do not reflect the views, policies, or position of the Journal.

Export citation