‘Had Child Before Marriage, Now Calls It Rape’: SC Flags ‘Inherent Risks’ in Live-In Relationships Amid Sexual Assault Claims— Where Does Consent End and Crime Begin?

The Supreme Court has pointed out the “inherent risks” associated with live-in relationships, while also noting a growing trend of women filing sexual assault cases against partners after such relationships end. A bench led by Justice B. V. Nagarathna was hearing a plea filed by a woman who accused her partner of rape and assault on the pretext of marriage. While examining the case, Justice Nagarathna rejected the woman’s allegations and highlighted the uncertainties of live-in relationships, observing that either partner can choose to leave at any point.

“This is what happens in live in relationships. For years, they lived together. If they split up, the lady has to file a complaint against the man for sexual assault. These are all the vagaries of relationships outside marriage,” the Supreme Court observed.

SC Flags ‘Inherent Risks’ in Live-In Relationships

“This is a live-in relationship. She went on to have a child with the man without marriage and now she is saying rape and assault. What is this?” Justice Nagarathna asked, questioning how a consensual relationship could lead to an allegation of sexual assault,” Justice Nagarathna said, as reported by NDTV.

When the woman’s counsel argued that the man was already married and has misled and abused her, Justic B.V. Nagarathna rmearked that the court could “sympathise with her that she got befooled or whatever.”

“Where is the question of offence when there is a consensual relationship? They are living together, and she begets a child from him. There is no marriage, and then she says sexual assault,” Live Law quoted the bench as saying.

Do Live-In Relationships Offer Limited Legal Protection, Says Supreme Court?

The courtThe court observed that if the couple had been legally married, the woman would have had stronger legal remedies, including the option to pursue charges like bigamy or claim maintenance. However, since the relationship was a live-in arrangement, it carried inherent risks, as either partner could leave at any time without legal obligations.

The Supreme Court, however, clarified that the woman is entitled to seek maintenance for the child, emphasising that while a relationship may be considered illegitimate, “a child cannot be illegitimate.” 

Underscoring the limited legal safeguards in live-in relationships, the court advised both parties to consider resolving the matter through mediation.

Also Read: Exit Polls vs Opinion Polls: What Is The Difference? Key Points You Must Know Ahead Of Assembly Elections 2026 Results