<p>The Supreme Court on Monday declined to entertain a plea for framing norms for registration of every live-in relationship with the central government, saying it is a “hare-brained” idea and should be with cost.</p>.<p>“What does the Centre have to do with the registration of live-in relationships? What kind of hare-brained idea is this," a bench of Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud and Justices P S Narasimha and J B Pardiwala told the counsel, appearing for the petitioner.</p>.<p>The bench also wondered if the petitioner wanted to foster security for these people or if she does not want them to get into live-in relationships. </p>.<p><strong>Also Read — <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/sc-gives-centre-deadlines-to-clear-orop-arrears-1201844.html" target="_blank">SC gives Centre deadlines to clear OROP arrears</a></strong></p>.<p>The plea by advocate Mamta Rani contended that she wanted the live-in relationship to be registered, to enhance social security.</p>.<p>“It is high time this court start imposing costs on petitioners who file these kinds of PILs. Dismissed,” the bench said.</p>.<p>The plea sought a direction to the central government to formulate rules for the registration of live-in relationships against the backdrop of an increase in crimes like rape and murder, which were allegedly committed by live-in partners.</p>.<p>The plea also referred to the killing of Shraddha Walker allegedly by her live-in partner Aaftab Amin Poonawala and sought framing of rules and guidelines for the registration of such relationships.</p>.<p>The PIL contended that registration of live-in relationships would result in accurate information pertaining to both partners about each other. It further stated that this would help the government to know details of the couple regarding their marital status, criminal history, and other relevant details.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Monday declined to entertain a plea for framing norms for registration of every live-in relationship with the central government, saying it is a “hare-brained” idea and should be with cost.</p>.<p>“What does the Centre have to do with the registration of live-in relationships? What kind of hare-brained idea is this," a bench of Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud and Justices P S Narasimha and J B Pardiwala told the counsel, appearing for the petitioner.</p>.<p>The bench also wondered if the petitioner wanted to foster security for these people or if she does not want them to get into live-in relationships. </p>.<p><strong>Also Read — <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/sc-gives-centre-deadlines-to-clear-orop-arrears-1201844.html" target="_blank">SC gives Centre deadlines to clear OROP arrears</a></strong></p>.<p>The plea by advocate Mamta Rani contended that she wanted the live-in relationship to be registered, to enhance social security.</p>.<p>“It is high time this court start imposing costs on petitioners who file these kinds of PILs. Dismissed,” the bench said.</p>.<p>The plea sought a direction to the central government to formulate rules for the registration of live-in relationships against the backdrop of an increase in crimes like rape and murder, which were allegedly committed by live-in partners.</p>.<p>The plea also referred to the killing of Shraddha Walker allegedly by her live-in partner Aaftab Amin Poonawala and sought framing of rules and guidelines for the registration of such relationships.</p>.<p>The PIL contended that registration of live-in relationships would result in accurate information pertaining to both partners about each other. It further stated that this would help the government to know details of the couple regarding their marital status, criminal history, and other relevant details.</p>
