Daijiworld Media Network – Dehradun
Dehradun, Feb 27: The Uttarakhand High Court raised significant concerns on Thursday regarding the evolving legal landscape of live-in relationships and their integration into the state’s Uniform Civil Code (UCC) law. While acknowledging that live-in relationships are increasingly common, the court pointed out that full societal acceptance is still developing. The court noted that the UCC law aims to address this shift by ensuring the rights of women and children born from such relationships, but also cautioned against potential overreach.
The observation came during the hearing of two Public Interest Litigations (PILs)—one filed by social activists from Uttarakhand and the other by a live-in couple. The couple challenged the constitutional validity of the state’s UCC Act, arguing that the law imposes unnecessary state surveillance on personal choices.
A Bench of Justices Manoj Kumar Tiwari and Ashish Naithani issued a notice and grouped these petitions with others addressing similar issues. The case is scheduled for further hearings on April 1.
Advocate Vrinda Grover, representing the petitioners, expressed concern that the UCC Act infringes on the right to privacy by allowing excessive monitoring and policing of private relationships. She argued that while the law claims to safeguard women’s rights, it could inadvertently lead to harassment, violence, and social surveillance against women and couples who do not adhere to mainstream societal norms.
Grover specifically criticized the mandatory registration of live-in relationships under the UCC, arguing that this provision could violate the Supreme Court’s privacy ruling in the Puttaswamy judgment. She also highlighted that the law allows external parties, including parents, to access registrants' personal details, which could encourage vigilantism. Grover contended that the law's focus on heteronormative frameworks violates individual autonomy, especially for members of the queer community.
In response to Grover’s concerns, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the state, assured the court that the law does not violate privacy rights and is designed as a regulatory mechanism to protect vulnerable women. He stated that the UCC Act, 2024 had been formulated after broad consultations with stakeholders to ensure the safety of those in live-in relationships.
The first PIL was filed by a couple in a consensual live-in relationship, with the female petitioner’s family supporting the relationship, while the male petitioner faces hostility from his family, including threats from his brother. The couple’s concerns have intensified since the UCC’s enactment, which mandates live-in registration and enforces punitive sanctions starting February 27, 2025. The female petitioner, identifying as queer, argued that being forced to register under a heteronormative framework infringes upon her right to self-determination.
The plea also challenged the UCC Act on grounds of constitutional violations, including privacy, dignity, and reproductive autonomy. It argued that the law’s binary gender framework fails to recognize diverse gender identities, violating constitutional rights.
The second PIL was filed by social justice advocates and a senior journalist, arguing that the UCC Act is regressive and fails to address the root causes of gender violence. The petitioners criticized the law for excluding Scheduled Tribes, transgender individuals, and LGBTQIA+ persons, arguing that it exacerbates legal inequities and deepens the marginalization of vulnerable communities.
The petition also pointed out the lack of procedural safeguards in the law, which could lead to further exploitation of marginalized groups. It emphasized the need for a more inclusive approach that aligns with the egalitarian vision of Article 44 of the Constitution.