In a significant intervention involving the rights of young consenting adults, the Delhi High Court stepped in to address allegations that a couple in a live-in relationship was facing threats from the woman’s father. The petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, sought urgent police protection, claiming that familial opposition had escalated into intimidation and posed a serious risk to the couple’s safety and liberty.
The controversy began when the couple approached the High Court asserting that they had been in a relationship since 2024 and were now living together after voluntarily executing a Live-in Relationship Agreement on February 17, 2026. Counsel for the petitioners argued that the woman’s father was vehemently opposed to their relationship and had allegedly been issuing threats of violence.
The plea contended that such intimidation endangered the couple’s fundamental right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Emphasizing that both individuals were adults born in 2006 and 2007 respectively, the petitioners urged the Court to intervene and direct authorities to safeguard them from potential harm.
The Court agreed that the law protects the autonomy of consenting adults to choose their partners and live together, even outside the institution of marriage. Referring to the landmark ruling in Nandakumar v. State of Kerala, the bench observed that adults have an “unfettered right to reside with each other as they desire, be it in a Live-In Relationship.”
It further underscored that constitutional freedoms cannot be curtailed by social disapproval, echoing the principle laid down in Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M.. Stressing that neither parents nor relatives can threaten or obstruct such choices, the Court noted, “No one… have any right and/or authority to cause any hinderance and/or interference of any kind to them, much less threaten their life and/or liberty.”
Consequently, the High Court allowed the petition and directed the local police at PS Daryaganj to provide necessary assistance and protection whenever required.
Case Title: Kartik & Anr. vs. State of Nct of Delhi & Ors.
Case No.: W.P.(Crl) 665/2026
Coram: Justice Saurabh Banerjee
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. Dilip Kumar Rana, Lokesh Sharma, Gauranshi Rawal, Sumit Panwar
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Yasir Rauf Ansari
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
