A bench of justices AR Masoodi and AK Srivastava-I made the observations while hearing a writ petition by Sneha Devi and Mohd Shadab Khan, who were seeking protection from police action after the woman's parents filed a kidnapping case against Khan, and directed that Sneha Devi be sent to her parents under security.

The petitioners claimed that they were in a live-in relationship but the woman's parents lodged a police complaint accusing Khan of kidnapping and inducing her to marry him.

They also sought protection of their lives and liberty, saying they were adults and as per the apex court, they were free to reside together in a live-in relationship.

"Islamic tenets do not permit live-in relationships during the subsisting marriage. The position may be different if the two persons are unmarried and the parties being major choose to lead their lives in a way of their own," the bench said while declining to pass an order on the issue of protection of life and liberty.

On an inquiry, the bench came to know that Khan was married to Farida Khatoon in 2020 and the couple had a baby.

The court observed that constitutional morality and social morality in the matter of marriage institutions required to be balanced, failing which social coherence for achieving the object of peace and tranquillity in the society would fade and disappear. It also directed the police that petitioner Sneha Devi be sent to her parents under security.

While the couple sought protection under Article 21 (protection of life and personal liberty), the court observed, "The constitutional morality may come to the rescue of such a couple and the social morality settled through the customs and usages over ages may give way to the constitutional morality and protection under Article 21 of the Constitution of India may step in to protect the cause. The case before us is, however, different."

"The constitutional protection under Article 21 of the Constitution of India would not lend an un-canalised support to such a right, once the usages and customs prohibit such a relationship between the two individuals of different faiths," the bench added.