IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established is that the consent in a live-in relationship must be voluntary and informed, and the legality of the relationship is determined by the existing legal framework, not by moral judgments.

JUDGMENT

Index to the Judgment

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

ARGUMENTS ADDRESSED BY THE PARTIES

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

i. The `Live-In-Relationship Agreement'

ii. Intricacies of Legal Framework and Boundaries of Personal Lives

The Essence of Live-in-Relationship

Dimensions of Live-in-Relationship

Distinction between `Live-in-Relationship' and `Relationship in Nature of Marriage'

iii. Rape on False Pretext of Marriage vs. Live-in-Relationship Agreement

LEGALITY, MORALITY, JUSTICE & COURTS: ARGUMENT OF ISSUE OF MORALITY RAISED BY PETITONER'S COUNSEL

i. Legality vs. Morality: A Legal Conundrum

ii. Legal Boundaries and Live-In Relationships: Navigating the Interplay of Law and Society

CONCLUSION

Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.

1. The instant writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (`Cr.P.C.') has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of FIR bearing no. 725/2022, registered at Police Station Bindapur, Delhi for the offences punishable under Sections 376/323/506/509/427 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (`IPC') and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

2. Brief facts of the case are that the present FIR was registered on 13.10.2022, on the basis of complaint lodged by respondent no. 2/complainant who had stated that the petitioner had met her for the first time in September, 2021 in Uttam Nagar, Delhi and he had promised to marry her, and on false promise of marriage, he had developed physical relations with her forcibly. It was stated that one month thereafter, the parties got prepared an affidavit (agreement for live-in-relationship) in which the accused/petitioner mentioned himself as bachelor. It was stated that thereafter, she had made him meet her parents in Bihar, however, whenever she had requested to meet his parents, the accused had always made one excuse or the other. It was further stated that in May, 2022, when she had come to know that he was already married and he had concealed this fact from her, thereafter, the accused had again promised her by way of an affidavit that he will divorce his wife within six months and that he had already applied for divorce from his wife. Thereafter, both of them had continued their relationship. It was alleged that on 24.09.2022, the accused had visited her home to meet her but he had intentionally fought with her and had broken her phone and had made physical relationship with her forcibly on the pretext that he would marry her soon. Thereafter, she had become pregnant, but the accused had stopped attending her phone calls, which had resulted into filing of present complaint and registration of FIR.

3. The petitioner by way of this petition states that the respondent no. 2 who has a child and is already married, on the pretext of being estranged from her husband, had "chased the petitioner and had encashed the fact that the young petitioner is staying away from his wife and she had succeeded in getting the petitioner succumbing to her desire". It is stated that respondent no. 2 had herself drafted the live-in-relationship agreement and had forged the signatures of the petitioner on the said agreement. However, it is stated that even as per the contents of aforesaid live-in-relationship agreement, the petitioner had agreed to enter into an agreement of live-in relationship with respondent no. 2 till her earlier marriage is dissolved. It is stated in the petition that as per agreement, the petitioner and respondent no. 2 had also agreed that during the course of their live-in-relationship, if they found each other suitable and compatible, they will explore the possibility of marrying each other by divorcing their respective spouses. It is further stated that respondent no. 2 had gone to petitioner's home at Tamil Nadu, and thereafter, had fabricated an affidavit dated 09.06.2022 forging his signatures on the same. It is stated that she had again forged his signatures on the affidavit dated 09.09.202