Taking up the issue on the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, on Wednesday, the directive came from the Rajasthan Human Rights Commission.
“The fundamental right to life granted by the Constitution cannot be abandoned. A life of a concubine cannot be called a dignified life for a woman. The word concubine in itself is serious character assassination and a disgusting way to address a woman. Such a woman cannot protect her rights in any sense", a media report quoted the bench as saying.
Commission member Mahesh Chandra Sharma has been in the news in the past for suggesting “Peahen drinks the tears of peacock to get pregnant”.
The commission’s request, however, evoked a sharp response from many on social media. Many of them termed the suggestion to prohibit “live-in relations” as an infringement of people’s right to lead life as per their wishes and a reflection of an archaic mind-set.
Some people, however, took offence to the rights body for terming women in live-in relationships as “concubines”, while several others mocked its member Mahesh Sharma for his old “Peacock” remark.
Live-In Relationships Should Be Banned, Says Rajasthan Rights Body .. woman in live-in is like a concubine..by the same retd Judge Mahesh Chandra Sharma who as HC judge, had made headlines with his "peacocks don't have sex" remark https://t.co/4rHZF1VZRK
— Gargi Rawat (@GargiRawat) September 5, 2019
@TimesNow This is an independent nation and every one has the right to live as they want to. This is a ridiculous statement by so called Rajasthan Human Rights Commission. I do not see anything in their statement that defends rights of people. Shame on them. https://t.co/snwGnF9aSK
— hitesh sikka (@hitesh_sikka) September 5, 2019
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
— Kams (@Kambamwhamm) September 5, 2019
How is it any business of Human Rights commission? Do they think that live in relationships are everything that affects the dignity of a woman?
Why don't they enact a law to respect women in all kinds of relationships, including live in relationships
Ok so the guy who said peahens become pregnant by drinking peacock tears is heading Rajasthan HRC!!! Now this makes perfect sense. Baskets!!
— Mona Ambegaonkar (@MonaAmbegaonkar) September 5, 2019
Human Rights trying to take away Human Rights lol 😂 pic.twitter.com/uQ1MdnRg1R
— Tanmay Chouhan (@TANinMAY) September 5, 2019
Others said that such steps could be useful for all those who have to suffer in their marriage due to such relationships or exploitation.
I support it, as Live in relationship are not good. Since family is not involved, neither society or govt is witness to the relationship predominantly women are at risk of exploitation.
— Somprakash Shukla (@SPShuklaji) September 4, 2019
In case man leaves the woman, then there are no legal or moral grounds to claim alimony.
Well i agree with this move
— Nightowl (@fevocism) September 4, 2019
The Rajasthan State Human Rights Commission has NOT said that women in Live-in relationships are like '#concubines' Please pause and read the last two pages of the judgment before jumping to conclusions.
— Anusha Soni (@AnushaSoni23) September 5, 2019
Stating that in live-in relationships a woman has to sacrifice her right to a dignified life, the Rajasthan Human Rights Commission said that it had invited suggestions from stakeholders, including police and civil society, on whether a law should be enacted to provide security to women in live-in relationships.
“It said since women in live-in relationships are not able to secure their fundamental rights, it was the duty of the State government and human right activists to run awareness campaigns against such cohabitation outside marital boundaries", an Indian news agency said, citing the commission’s request to the Rajasthan and central governments.
“It is the duty of the state and the central governments to take immediate steps and prohibit live-in relationships by enacting a law”, the Bench added.
