In a significant judgment reinforcing individual rights and evolving social values, the Supreme Court has ruled that a consensual premarital relationship between two unmarried adults cannot, by itself, be considered moral turpitude or used to question a person’s character or suitability for employment.
The landmark observation came while the apex court allowed the appointment of a candidate to the Telangana Police force after his recruitment was previously cancelled due to a criminal case linked to a past relationship.
Supreme Court Upholds Individual Dignity
A bench comprising Justices Manoj Misra and Manmohan set aside the Telangana government’s decision to deny the candidate a police job despite the criminal case having been amicably resolved through a Lok Adalat.
The court observed that consensual relationships between unmarried adults are not prohibited under Indian law and should not automatically lead to adverse conclusions regarding a person’s moral character.
According to the judgment, authorities must exercise caution and avoid making assumptions about an individual’s integrity solely based on personal relationships.
Changing Social Realities Must Be Recognised
The Supreme Court emphasized that public institutions should remain sensitive to changing societal norms and realities.
The bench noted that premarital relationships have become increasingly common in modern society and cannot be viewed through outdated moral standards when assessing a person’s eligibility for public employment.
The court further stated that a consensual physical relationship between adults should not be used as a factor to tarnish an individual’s reputation or professional prospects.
Background of the Case
The petitioner had applied for recruitment into the Telangana Police and had disclosed the existence of a criminal case during the selection process. He also informed the authorities that the matter had already been settled amicably.
The dispute originated after the candidate married another woman, following which his former partner filed a complaint against him. However, the matter was later resolved through legal settlement mechanisms, and the complainant chose not to pursue the case further.
Despite the settlement, the candidate’s appointment was denied on grounds related to character assessment.
Court Rejects State’s Argument
The Telangana government argued that even a minor doubt regarding a candidate’s character could justify denial of appointment to a disciplined force such as the police.
The Supreme Court rejected this reasoning, observing that there was no valid basis to draw negative conclusions about the candidate’s character when the complainant herself had agreed to settle the dispute and discontinue legal proceedings.
The court stressed that settled cases involving consensual relationships should not become permanent barriers to employment opportunities.
Important Observation on Consent
The bench also highlighted that courts across the country have repeatedly quashed criminal proceedings in cases where relationships between adults were found to be consensual.
It observed that criminal law should not be misused to retrospectively criminalise personal relationships that were entered into with free and informed consent.
Significance of the Judgment
Legal experts believe the ruling strengthens constitutional values related to personal liberty, dignity and equality. The judgment also sends a clear message that recruitment decisions must be based on objective standards rather than moral assumptions about private relationships.
The verdict is expected to have wider implications for employment screening processes, particularly in government services and law enforcement agencies, where character verification often plays a crucial role.
By recognising changing social realities and reaffirming the importance of consent, the Supreme Court has reinforced that a person’s private consensual relationship cannot be used as a tool to deny professional opportunities or question their character.
