Haryana stands at a social crossroads. As urbanisation, digital connectivity, and modern ideas reshape relationships, the growing trend of live-in relationships has stirred significant debate. The issue leapt into sharp focus following statements by Renu Bhatia, Chairperson of the Haryana State Women Commission, who identified live-in arrangements as a substantial factor behind the state’s increasing divorce rates and family breakdowns.
Speaking candidly during her official visit to Kaithal, Bhatia shared that nearly 60 per cent of divorce and family dispute cases registered during her tenure can be traced back to complications arising from live-in relationships. It’s a striking figure in a state where traditional family structures have long been the backbone of social stability.
“The cases we encounter daily reveal a deep link between live-in relationships and marital discord,” said Bhatia. “Many couples enter live-ins without genuine understanding or commitment, often under the influence of social media. When these relationships dissolve, the emotional scars and practical entanglements create lasting disruptions, even when people subsequently marry.”
Her remarks tap into a larger conversation reverberating across Haryana’s urban and rural landscapes. On one side stand voices advocating for personal freedom and evolving social norms; on the other are those worried about the potential erosion of family systems and traditional moral frameworks.
Society’s Clash with Changing Relationship Patterns
For decades, Haryana has carried a reputation as a state deeply rooted in conservative cultural values, with families closely monitoring marital choices and social conduct. Yet, in cities like Gurugram, Faridabad, and even growing towns like Panipat and Hisar, rapid urbanisation has introduced new lifestyles. Young professionals, students, and migrants live away from families, leading to social spaces where live-in relationships are increasingly visible.
While the practice remains controversial and rare compared to other parts of India, it’s growing enough to unsettle segments of society. Many older residents view it as a threat to the sanctity of marriage.
“Live-ins are not merely a personal choice. They leave social consequences that ripple into families, affecting parents, siblings, and future marriages,” said Bhatia. She believes that the emotional fallout from failed live-in partnerships often complicates subsequent marriages, leading to mistrust and disillusionment.
Her statements come amid a surge in cases involving marital discord, many of which stem from previous live-in arrangements that either turned sour or left emotional baggage unresolved.
One prominent thread in Bhatia’s concerns is the role of social media platforms in forging modern relationships. Apps and social networks have enabled connections across cities and states, blurring traditional social boundaries.
“Relationships formed over social media often lack depth and proper understanding,” Bhatia warned. “People meet online, fall in love quickly, move in together, and face conflicts when reality hits. Parents should be vigilant and teach children about the importance of values, commitment, and careful decision-making.”
Many parents, however, confess to struggling with this new terrain. The generational gap is not merely about technology but about differing perceptions of love, freedom, and social obligations.
“I don’t even know who my daughter chats with on her phone,” said Sunita Yadav, a mother from Karnal. “We want our children to be happy, but we worry about their future if they rush into relationships without thinking.”
Pre-Wedding Counselling: A New State Initiative
In response to rising concerns over marital instability, the Haryana State Women Commission is rolling out an ambitious plan. Bhatia announced that pre-wedding counselling centres would soon operate across the state. The model draws inspiration from existing centres in Gurugram and Faridabad, which have reportedly helped couples navigate relationship expectations before tying the knot.
“Counselling helps couples understand their responsibilities, emotional needs, and practical challenges of married life,” said Bhatia. “We want to ensure that before taking the significant step of marriage, couples are equipped to handle its realities.”
The Kaithal district administration has pledged land for one such centre, and the Women Commission intends to expand similar facilities to other districts.
In a move that could spark further debate, Bhatia proposed making pre-wedding counselling mandatory, linking it directly to marriage registration. “Without attending a session and receiving a certificate, couples should not be allowed to register their marriage. This can help reduce misunderstandings that often escalate into marital conflicts.”
Such measures, though welcomed by some as progressive and pragmatic, raise questions about personal liberty and whether mandatory counselling infringes on privacy.
Conflicts Over Parents: A Growing Marital Fault Line
Beyond live-in relationships, Bhatia also highlighted another sensitive fault line emerging in modern marriages—the unequal treatment of parents by spouses. She observed that growing numbers of couples fall into conflict over differences in how they regard each other’s families.
“The distinction between ‘my parents’ and ‘your parents’ is tearing many marriages apart,” Bhatia said. “Couples must cultivate an attitude of equal respect towards both sides of the family. A marriage isn’t just about two people but about merging two families.”
Lawyers and family counsellors confirm this trend. Advocates in family courts across Haryana report that disputes over parents often escalate into bitter legal battles involving property, living arrangements, and care obligations.
“It’s not unusual for husbands to insist on supporting their own parents while neglecting their in-laws, or vice versa,” said advocate Rajesh Chahal from Hisar. “This imbalance can breed resentment and create cracks in the marriage.”
Such issues are amplified in joint family systems, where financial and emotional responsibilities extend across generations. In urban nuclear families, while physical separation might reduce immediate conflicts, emotional expectations still loom large.
Ground Reality in Kaithal: A Glimpse into Women’s Rights Challenges
During her visit to Kaithal, Bhatia took stock of ongoing cases of crimes against women. Her schedule included a visit to the One-Stop Centre, an institution that offers immediate help to survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and other gender-based crimes. She also inspected the district jail and met with Kaithal’s Deputy Commissioner to discuss local issues.
On that day, Bhatia addressed 12 pending cases related to women’s grievances. Four cases were resolved on the spot through intervention and dialogue. The rest await judicial proceedings or further investigation. In at least three cases, the Commission issued summons for both parties to appear within the next ten days.
Among the day’s notable cases was a complaint involving an NRI husband accused of marriage fraud. Bhatia ordered the authorities to seize his passport and initiate legal proceedings, underscoring the state’s determination to address crimes committed by individuals residing abroad.
Another case revolved around a woman from Maharashtra, who alleged that an ITBP sub-inspector had entered into multiple marriages without legally dissolving his previous ones. Bhatia summoned the officer to appear before the Commission for questioning, promising decisive action.
“These cases reflect the grim realities that many women still face,” Bhatia said. “We’re working to ensure that justice isn’t delayed and that women feel secure enough to come forward.”
The growing discourse around live-in relationships and marital discord reveals a state grappling with its identity. Haryana has achieved significant strides in women’s education, employment, and economic participation. Yet, the question remains: how will its social fabric adapt to new relationship models and shifting definitions of marriage and family?
Supporters of live-in relationships argue that the right to choose how one lives is fundamental. “People should be allowed to explore compatibility before marriage,” said Radhika Sharma, a 28-year-old software engineer from Gurugram. “It’s better than getting married and discovering you’re entirely mismatched.”
Opponents counter that live-in relationships destabilize social systems and lead to rising mental health issues, exploitation, and family breakdowns. “Traditional marriage has worked for centuries. Why dismantle it?” asked Ravinder Malik, a retired teacher from Rohtak.
Religious and social leaders have also weighed in. Several khap panchayats, traditionally influential in Haryana’s rural areas, have publicly opposed live-in arrangements, citing cultural norms and community honour. However, younger generations, particularly in urban zones, increasingly reject these constraints.
Economic and Legal Dimensions
The legal standing of live-in relationships in India remains complex. The Supreme Court has upheld the right of consenting adults to live together, even without marriage. Yet, couples in live-in relationships often face social ostracism, property disputes, and legal challenges, especially around inheritance rights and domestic violence protections.
In Haryana, these tensions are compounded by the state’s unique cultural context, where land ownership, inheritance laws, and community ties add further stakes to personal relationships.
Economically, women leaving live-in relationships often find themselves vulnerable, especially if financially dependent on their partners. Bhatia emphasized that young women must ensure their financial independence and safeguard their legal rights.
“Too often, women emerge from these relationships without any legal security, emotional support, or resources,” Bhatia said. “We need both awareness and legal mechanisms to protect their interests.”
The Way Ahead: Balancing Freedom and Responsibility
Bhatia’s call for stronger moral education, mandatory counselling, and family support reflects an attempt to bridge the gap between evolving personal freedoms and traditional family values. Whether these initiatives will succeed remains uncertain.
Experts suggest that merely condemning live-in relationships may not resolve the underlying issues. Instead, they argue for comprehensive education on relationships, legal rights, mental health, and financial planning.
“It’s not about banning live-ins but equipping individuals to handle the emotional and practical realities of modern relationships,” said sociologist Dr. Meena Hooda. “If young people are better informed, they’ll make wiser choices, whether that means marrying, living together, or staying single.”
Meanwhile, the Haryana State Women Commission plans to increase outreach, conduct workshops in colleges, and engage community leaders to discuss relationship dynamics and women’s rights.
As Haryana confronts the implications of live-in relationships, it faces a delicate balancing act. The state stands at the intersection of age-old traditions and rapidly transforming social dynamics. Voices like Renu Bhatia’s underscore the challenges of preserving family harmony while respecting personal freedom.
Whether through counselling, legal reforms, or community dialogue, Haryana’s journey towards reconciling modern relationship choices with its deeply rooted cultural fabric will shape not only the state’s social future but also the personal destinies of thousands navigating love, marriage, and family in an era of change.
