An adult couple has a right to live together without marriage, the Supreme Court said, while asserting that a 20-year-old Kerala woman, whose marriage had been annulled, could choose whom she wanted to live with.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/R1aTow3UCyY" width="560"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The top court held that live-in relationships were now even recognized by the Legislature and they had found a place under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.&nbsp;

The observations came while the apex court was hearing a plea filed by one Nandakumar against a Kerala High Court order annulling his marriage with Thushara on the ground that he had not attained the legal age of marriage.

Prohibition of Child Marriage Act states that a girl can't marry before the age of 18, and a boy before 21.

Nandakumar, who had approached the top court, will turn 21 on May 30 this year.

The high court had also granted the custody of Thushara to her father after noting that she was not Nandakumar's "lawfully wedded" wife.

A bench of justices A K Sikri and Ashok Bhushan said their marriage could not said to be "null and void" merely because Nandakumar was less than 21 years of age at the time of marriage.

"Appellant no 1 as well as Thushara are Hindus. Such a marriage is not a void marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and as per the provisions of section 12, which can be attracted in such a case, at the most, the marriage would be a voidable marriage...

"It is sufficient to note that both appellant no 1 and Thushara are major. Even if they were not competent to enter into wedlock (which position itself is disputed), they have right to live together even outside wedlock," the bench said.

While setting aside the order of the high court granting custody of woman to her father, the apex court said that "we make it clear that the freedom of choice would be of Thushara as to with whom she wants to live".

It also referred to a recent case involving a woman from Kerala, Hadiya, where it had restored her marriage with Shafin Jahan on the ground that it was a marriage between two consenting adults.

The apex court had also clarified that a court cannot interfere in the marriage of two consenting adult and cannot annul the marriage in a habeas corpus (a writ requiring a person under arrest to be brought before a judge or into court, for securing the person's release) petition.&nbsp;

The top court held that live-in relationships were now even recognized by the Legislature and they had found a place under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

An adult couple has a right to live together without marriage, the Supreme Court said, while asserting that a 20-year-old Kerala woman, whose marriage had been annulled, could choose whom she wanted to live with. × The top court held that live-in relationships were now even recognized by the Legislature and they had found a place under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The observations came while the apex court was hearing a plea filed by one Nandakumar against a Kerala High Court order annulling his marriage with Thushara on the ground that he had not attained the legal age of marriage. Prohibition of Child Marriage Act states that a girl can't marry before the age of 18, and a boy before 21. Nandakumar, who had approached the top court, will turn 21 on May 30 this year. The high court had also granted the custody of Thushara to her father after noting that she was not Nandakumar's "lawfully wedded" wife. A bench of justices A K Sikri and Ashok Bhushan said their marriage could not said to be "null and void" merely because Nandakumar was less than 21 years of age at the time of marriage. "Appellant no 1 as well as Thushara are Hindus. Such a marriage is not a void marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and as per the provisions of section 12, which can be attracted in such a case, at the most, the marriage would be a voidable marriage... "It is sufficient to note that both appellant no 1 and Thushara are major. Even if they were not competent to enter into wedlock (which position itself is disputed), they have right to live together even outside wedlock," the bench said. While setting aside the order of the high court granting custody of woman to her father, the apex court said that "we make it clear that the freedom of choice would be of Thushara as to with whom she wants to live". It also referred to a recent case involving a woman from Kerala, Hadiya, where it had restored her marriage with Shafin Jahan on the ground that it was a marriage between two consenting adults. The apex court had also clarified that a court cannot interfere in the marriage of two consenting adult and cannot annul the marriage in a habeas corpus (a writ requiring a person under arrest to be brought before a judge or into court, for securing the person's release) petition.

Adult couple can live together without marriage: Supreme Court

A 15-year-old boy was killed, his body burnt by his own mother in Kerala&#39;s Kollam. The accused woman, 45-year-old Jayamol, has confessed to her crime, the police said on Thursday.

According to the police, Jayamol killed her son Jeethu Job for teasing her. She first pushed him down in the kitchen and then strangled him with a shawl. To hide the crime, she set the body on fire, cops added.

The police was able to nab the woman after discovering that she had burn marks on her hand. Jayamol had tried to divert cops&#39; attention by approaching the local police station on Monday to file a complaint about her missing son. When the police began its investigation, they discovered the boy&#39;s half-burned body near the house.

When the police questioned Jayamol, she admitted to have committed the crime.

He husband Job V John told the police that Jayamol is mentally unstable and committed the crime after being teased by her son.

The police said when they took the woman to her house for investigation, she was booed by her neighbours.

The police, meanwhile, said they are investigating all possible angles in the case.

According to the police, Jayamol killed her son Jeethu Job for teasing her.

A 15-year-old boy was killed, his body burnt by his own mother in Kerala's Kollam. The accused woman, 45-year-old Jayamol, has confessed to her crime, the police said on Thursday. According to the police, Jayamol killed her son Jeethu Job for teasing her. She first pushed him down in the kitchen and then strangled him with a shawl. To hide the crime, she set the body on fire, cops added. The police was able to nab the woman after discovering that she had burn marks on her hand. Jayamol had tried to divert cops' attention by approaching the local police station on Monday to file a complaint about her missing son. When the police began its investigation, they discovered the boy's half-burned body near the house. When the police questioned Jayamol, she admitted to have committed the crime. He husband Job V John told the police that Jayamol is mentally unstable and committed the crime after being teased by her son. The police said when they took the woman to her house for investigation, she was booed by her neighbours. The police, meanwhile, said they are investigating all possible angles in the case.

Kerala woman killed son, burnt his body: Police

Kerala woman, Hadiya, who is in the midst of Love Jihad controversy, will depose before the Supreme Court on Monday to tell her side of the story.

&quot;I am a Muslim. I want to go with my husband. Nobody forced me to convert,&quot; shouted Hadiya as she was rushed by her parents and security personnel to board a flight to Delhi amid tight security on Sunday.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/hadiyas-statements-cannot-be-taken-at-face-value-fathers-lawyer-25176" target="_blank">Also read:&nbsp;Hadiya&#39;s statements cannot be taken at face value, says father&#39;s lawyer</a>

Hadiya, originally a Hindu, converted to Islam and married a Muslim man Shafin Jahan.

The National Investigation Agency (NIA), which is probing the case has alleged that Hadiya was indoctrinated and she may be incapable of giving free consent to her marriage.

The NIA had said there was a well-oiled machinery working in Kerala that has indoctrinated and radicalised her.&nbsp;

As many as 89 cases of similar nature have been reported from the southern state, Additional Solicitor General Maninder Singh, who is representing the NIA, told the top court.

Meanwhile, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, counsel for Shafin Jahan, had opposed the NIA&#39;s submission and that of the woman&#39;s father.

Advocate Shyam Divan, representing Hadiya&#39;s father KM Ashokan recently said that whatever she said &quot;could not be accepted at face value&quot;.

The lawyer said that Hadiya&#39;s behaviour with her family was not normal and what she told the press could not be taken as &quot;her own free comments&quot;.

&quot;What Hadiya is saying cannot be accepted at its face value because she was made to say so, and that is our impression. Her behaviour with her family was not normal. Whatever she has said to the media cannot be taken as her own free comments,&quot; the lawyer told ANI.

A Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud had asked Hadiya&#39;s father&#39;s advocate to ensure she is produced before them to ascertain whether she had married of her own free will.

Hadiya had converted to Islam and married a Muslim man, Shafin Jahan

Kerala woman, Hadiya, who is in the midst of Love Jihad controversy, will depose before the Supreme Court on Monday to tell her side of the story. "I am a Muslim. I want to go with my husband. Nobody forced me to convert," shouted Hadiya as she was rushed by her parents and security personnel to board a flight to Delhi amid tight security on Sunday. Also read: Hadiya's statements cannot be taken at face value, says father's lawyer Hadiya, originally a Hindu, converted to Islam and married a Muslim man Shafin Jahan. The National Investigation Agency (NIA), which is probing the case has alleged that Hadiya was indoctrinated and she may be incapable of giving free consent to her marriage. The NIA had said there was a well-oiled machinery working in Kerala that has indoctrinated and radicalised her. As many as 89 cases of similar nature have been reported from the southern state, Additional Solicitor General Maninder Singh, who is representing the NIA, told the top court. Meanwhile, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, counsel for Shafin Jahan, had opposed the NIA's submission and that of the woman's father. Advocate Shyam Divan, representing Hadiya's father KM Ashokan recently said that whatever she said "could not be accepted at face value". The lawyer said that Hadiya's behaviour with her family was not normal and what she told the press could not be taken as "her own free comments". "What Hadiya is saying cannot be accepted at its face value because she was made to say so, and that is our impression. Her behaviour with her family was not normal. Whatever she has said to the media cannot be taken as her own free comments," the lawyer told ANI. A Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud had asked Hadiya's father's advocate to ensure she is produced before them to ascertain whether she had married of her own free will.

Kerala 'love jihad' case: Hadiya to appear in Supreme Court today

kerala-woman

Kerala Woman, News on Kerala Woman, stories on Kerala Woman, articles on Kerala Woman, Kerala Woman stories at Wion, Kerala Woman news, Kerala Woman latest news

kerala woman

Adult couple can live together without marriage: Supreme Court

Kerala woman killed son, burnt his body: Police

Kerala 'love jihad' case: Hadiya to appear in Supreme Court today