Pre-marital consensual relationship not 'character flaw': Indian Supreme Court

A consensual romantic relationship before marriage cannot be considered a character flaw or stigma, India's Supreme Court has ruled, stating that authorities must be more sensitive given changing social realities.

The bench of Justices Manoj Mishra and Manmohan delivered the observation while hearing an appeal against the cancellation of a police constable candidate's recruitment. The Hindu reported the news on Monday, June 8.

The court said that while character verification for law enforcement recruitment is important, pre-marital romantic relationships are very common in modern society and should not be used to create a negative impression about a person's character. Such consensual physical relationships between two unmarried adults cannot be used as grounds to question their character, as there is no legal prohibition on such relationships.

The Telangana State Level Police Recruitment Board had declared the candidate unsuitable for employment due to an old criminal case. The candidate had disclosed the case at the time of application. The complainant, a woman, had alleged a four-year romantic relationship during which the man promised to marry her but later married someone else.

The woman filed a case of cheating and intimidation. A charge sheet was submitted, but no charges of rape were proven. The matter was settled in a Lok Adalat before trial began.

Despite the settlement and the candidate's full disclosure, the recruitment board declared him unsuitable, arguing that a compromise implies admission of guilt and cannot be considered a complete exoneration.

The Supreme Court termed this "illogical" and a "perverse interpretation." The court noted that many such criminal cases over broken marriage promises in long-term relationships have been dismissed in the past, as such relationships are generally based on mutual consent.

"Not every relationship culminates in marriage. One cannot conclude that just because a relationship did not end in marriage, one party cheated the other," the court observed.

The court also reiterated the fundamental principle that an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Since the complainant herself agreed to a compromise, the recruitment authority should not have drawn negative inferences about the candidate's character.

However, the court clarified that recruiting authorities can examine a candidate's criminal past, but any adverse decision must be based on objective and acceptable evidence of the crime and the individual's involvement.

The Supreme Court ultimately allowed the police constable candidate's appeal and upheld his recruitment, quashing the contrary order.