3 weeks ago
Supreme Court Extends Cruelty Law to Marriage-Like Live-In Relationships
In India, there is a law called Section 498A that punishes a husband or his relatives for being cruel to a wife.
For a long time, people thought this law only helped women who were officially married.
The Supreme Court of India has now said that women in live-in relationships that are very much like a marriage can also use this law, but only if the couple intended to marry.
The court said violence and cruelty can happen in live-in relationships too, not only in formal marriages.
To use the law, a woman must show her relationship was like a marriage and that the couple planned to get married.
Things like engagements, wedding dates, invitations, family talks, and messages can help prove this.
Some women's rights activists are happy but worry it will still be hard to prove the relationship and to get police help.
Activists for LGBTQIA+ people say the ruling only protects women against male partners, leaving trans, queer, and non-binary survivors without a clear remedy.
The case began with complaints filed by a woman who lived with her partner in Bengaluru.
The Supreme Court ruled that a woman in a live-in relationship resembling marriage can seek criminal action under Section 498A of the IPC if the couple intended to marry.
The ruling stemmed from complaints filed in 2016 alleging cruelty, dowry harassment, concealment of an earlier marriage, and burn injuries to the woman's leg.
The court rejected the accused's argument that Section 498A applies only to a valid marriage, saying formal marital status has no rational link to the provision's purpose.
The judgment requires proof of a "relationship like marriage" and an intention to marry, with documentary and third-party evidence carrying more weight than mere assertion.
Activists warned that proving the relationship and securing a proper police response remain difficult, and LGBTQIA+ activists called the ruling heteronormative.
- Who
- The Supreme Court of India, a woman who filed cruelty complaints, and women's and LGBTQIA+ rights activists responding to the ruling.
- What
- Ruled that Section 498A of the IPC can apply to women in live-in relationships resembling marriage when there is an intention to marry.
- Where
- India; the couple had lived together in Bengaluru.
- When
- The complaints were filed in 2016; the Supreme Court ruling is recent, though the article does not give its date.
- Why
- To extend protection against cruelty to women in marriage-like live-in relationships, because abuse can occur outside a formal marriage.
Protective expansion of the law
Strict reading of criminal law
Section 498A for live-in couples
Protective expansion of the law
Women in long-term, marriage-like live-in relationships who face cruelty should have the same criminal remedy as married women; violence cannot be defined by a marriage certificate.
Strict reading of criminal law
Section 498A is a penal provision that should be interpreted narrowly and apply only to a valid marriage, as the accused argued when seeking to quash the proceedings.
LGBTQIA+ coverage
Protective expansion of the law
The ruling remains heteronormative: it assumes abuse happens to a woman at the hands of a male partner and leaves trans men, queer men, non-binary people, and same-sex couples without a clear remedy.
Strict reading of criminal law
The judgment deliberately confines its ruling to a woman against a male partner treated as a husband with an intention to marry, matching the provision's language.
Key facts
- Legal provision
- Section 498A, Indian Penal Code (cruelty by husband or relatives)
- Test for application
- A relationship like marriage plus an intention to marry
- Complaints filed
- 2016
- Alleged marriage date
- October 17, 2010 (Hindu customs, disputed by accused)
- Couple's residence
- Bengaluru
- Allegations
- Concealment of earlier marriage, dowry harassment, physical cruelty, burn injuries to leg
- Activists' concern
- Proving the relationship and securing a proper police response remain difficult
- Scope of ruling
- Confined to a woman, a male partner treated as a husband, and an intention to marry
Quotes
Patruni Chidananda Sastry
LGBTQIA+ rights activist, drag artiste and founder of DragVanti
“"It assumes abuse happens to a woman at the hands of a male partner. What happens when the survivor is a trans man, queer man or non-binary person?"”
deccanchronicle.com
“"You cannot define violence or its nature based on a formal marriage certificate."”
deccanchronicle.com
Sources
Related news
Supreme Court extends cruelty safeguards to live-in partners
Supreme Court extends Section 498A protection to live-in relationships
Delhi High Court Protects Live-In Couple, Affirms Choice Rights
Twisha Sharma Case Moves Toward Trial Over Alleged Cruelty
Allahabad High Court: Calling wife 'barren woman' insensitive, not cruelty
Supreme Court Questions IPS Deputation for CAPF Leadership Positions
Supreme Court Quashes 20-Year Conviction, Reaffirms Juvenile Legal Protections
Two Years After RG Kar Doctor's Rape-Murder, Case Remains Unresolved
ED widens Chhattisgarh probes with two arrests and searches
Delhi High Court Orders Madhya Pradesh to Pay Advocate Dues
