The Allahabad High Court recently rejected a plea to protect a live-in couple comprising a Hindu man and a Muslim woman, after noting that the woman was yet to divorce her earlier husband and that her live-in relationship with another man is prohibited under Muslim Law (Shariat).
The Court observed that a legally wedded Muslim wife cannot engage in extramarital relationships, and her live-in relationship with another man would constitute 'Zina' (fornication) and 'Haram' (forbidden) under the Shariat Law.
The Court also noted that the Muslim woman in the live-in relationship was still governed by Muslim law since she had not filed any application to convert her religion.
Justice Renu Agarwal added that if the woman was living with a man other than her husband without obtaining a divorce from her husband, it may constitute the offence of bigamy under the Indian Penal Code. The Court proceeded to dismiss the live-in couple's plea for protection.
"Such type of criminal act cannot be supported and protected by the Court," the judge said.
The Court was hearing a protection plea filed by a married Muslim woman and her Hindu live-in partner expressing concern for the woman's safety. The Court was told that the woman's father and other relatives were threatening the couple.
The woman told the Court that her husband had already remarried and was living with a second wife.
Consequently, she said that she returned to her parental home, but later chose to live with a Hindu man due to mistreatment by her father.
The State opposed the couple's plea for protection by submitting that since the woman had not obtained a divorce from her earlier husband and had started living with the Hindu man in adultery, the live-in relationship could not be protected by law.
The Court agreed with the State's stance.
After referring to various judgments, the Court concluded that the married Muslim woman's live-in relationship violated the Muslim law (Shariat), "wherein legally wedded wife cannot go outside marriage."
Such acts by Muslim women are defined as Zina and Haram, the Court observed.
"If we go to the criminality of the act of petitioner no.1 she may be prosecuted for the offence under section 494 (bigamy) and 495 IPC, as such relationship is not covered within the phrase of live-in relationship or relationship in the nature of marriage," the Court added.
The Court further noted that the woman was still "Muslim by religion and she has not moved any application to the authority concerned for conversion of her religion under sections 8 and 9 of the Conversion Act."
In view of this, the Court found that she was not eligible for the protection sought and dismissed the plea by her and her live-in partner.
Advocates Gurfan Ali and Abad Ali Tyagi appeared for the petitioners (live-in couple).
[Read Judgment]