Source: The Hindu 

Introduction 

Recently the Kerala High Court has ruled that Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which criminalizes cruelty against a woman by her husband or his relatives, does not apply to couples in live-in relationships. The court clarified that the term "husband" which only refers specifically to a legally married man.  

• A woman's partner in a live-in relationship cannot be prosecuted under Section 498A of IPC for cruelty. This decision was made in a case where a man sought to quash proceedings against him under this section.  
• The court emphasized that marriage in the eyes of the law is essential for a man to be considered a "husband" for the purposes of Section 498A IPC. 

What is the Background and Court Observation of the X v. State of Kerala? 

Background: 

• The petitioner was in a live-in relationship with a woman from March to August 2023. 
• The woman filed a complaint against the petitioner, alleging mental and physical harassment during their relationship. 
• Criminal proceedings were initiated against the petitioner under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 
  • The petitioner approached the Kerala High Court to quash these proceedings. 

Court Observations: 

• Section 498A of the IPC specifically applies to cruelty committed by a husband or his relatives against a woman. 
• The term "husband" in this context refers only to a legally married man. 
  • A live-in partner, not legally married, does not fall under the definition of "husband" for Section 498A IPC. 
• Based on the observations, the court concluded that the petitioner, being in a live-in relationship without legal marriage, could not be prosecuted under Section 498A IPC. 

What is the Position of Live-in Relation in India? 

• Legal Recognition Evolution:  
  • While historically taboo, live-in relationships have gained increasing acceptance in urban India, with legal protections evolving to address this social change. 
• Economic Rights under Domestic Violence Act: 
  • The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 extends certain economic rights to female partners in live-in relationships. 
• Maharashtra Government Proposal:  
  • In 2008, Maharashtra proposed granting wife-like status to women in live-in relationships for a 'reasonable period', with the duration to be determined case-by-case. 
• National Commission for Women Recommendation:  
  • The NCW recommended amending the definition of 'wife' in Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code to include women in live-in relationships, aiming to extend legal protections. 
• Judicial Committee Recommendations:  
  • The Justice Malimath Committee advocated for deeming long-term cohabitation as marriage and suggested amending the CrPC to allow maintenance claims for women in live-in relationships. 
•  Supreme Court Rulings on Maintenance: 
  •  In 2009, the Supreme Court held that formal proof of marriage is not necessary for maintenance claims under Section 125 CrPC, effectively extending this right to women in live-in relationships. 
• High Court Ruling on Cohabitation Rights:  
  • The Allahabad High Court affirmed the right of consenting adults to cohabit without marriage, while the Supreme Court has ruled that long-term live-in relationships may be treated as marriages, with children from such unions considered legitimate. 
• Other :  
  • The legal validity of live-in relationships was first established by a Supreme Court verdict in 1978. 
  • Factors such as mutual consent, willpower, and legal marriageable age are considered in recognizing live-in relationships. 
  • Couples who have cohabited for a significant period may be treated as married under certain legal interpretations. 

What are Statutory Provisions of Live-in Relationships in India ? 

• Constitutional Basis: 
  •  The foundation for the legal recognition of live-in relationships in India stems from Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.  
  • The Supreme Court, through its interpretative jurisdiction, has extended this right to encompass the right to live with a partner of one's choice, irrespective of marital status. 
• Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005:  
  • This Act is pivotal in providing legal recognition and protection to women in live-in relationships.  
  • Section 2(f) of the Act defines "domestic relationship" to include relationships "in the nature of marriage."  
  • This provision extends the Act's protections to women in live-in relationships, allowing them to seek remedies against domestic violence. 
• Criminal Procedure Code, 1973:  
  • Section 125 of the CrPC, which deals with maintenance, has been interpreted by courts to include women in live-in relationships within its ambit. 
  • In Chanmuniya v. Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha (2011), the Supreme Court held that women in live-in relationships are entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. 
• Indian Evidence Act, 1872:  
  • Section 114 of the Evidence Act allows for a presumption of marriage in cases of long-term cohabitation.  
  • This presumption has been applied by courts to protect the rights of partners in live-in relationships. 

What is Legality of Live-in Relationships in India? 

• Badri Prasad v. Dy. Director of Consolidation (1978): The Supreme Court held that cohabitation between two consenting adults of legal age and sound mind shall be deemed lawful, absent any statutory prohibition. This landmark ruling established the legality of live-in relationships in India. 
• Indra Sharma v. V.K. Sharma (2013): The Court delineated specific criteria for determining whether a live-in relationship constitutes a "relationship in the nature of marriage" under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 
• Lata Singh v. State of U.P. (2006): While acknowledging potential ethical concerns, the Court affirmed that live-in relationships are not per se illegal under Indian jurisprudence. 
• S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal and Anr (2010): The Court held that cohabitation is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, thereby reaffirming the legal status of live-in relationships. 
• Indra Sarma v. VKV Sarma (2013): The Court clarified that a consensual live-in relationship between two unmarried adults does not constitute an offense under Indian law. 
•  Abhijit Bhikaseth Auti v. State of Maharashtra and Anr (2009): The Court expanded the interpretation of Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, holding that a woman need not prove marriage to claim maintenance, thus extending legal protections to partners in live-in relationships. 
• SPS Balasubramanian v. Suruttayan (1993): The Court established a presumption of marriage for long-term cohabiting couples, unless proven otherwise, and affirmed the inheritance rights of children born from such relationships. 
• Ajay Bhardwaj v. Jyotsna (2016):The Court extended the protective ambit of Section 125 CrPC to partners in live-in relationships, interpreting the provision's intent to prevent destitution and homelessness as applicable to such unions. 
• These judgments collectively establish a legal framework recognizing and protecting the rights of individuals in live-in relationships, while also addressing related issues such as maintenance, inheritance, and the status of children born from such unions. 

What are the Rights and Obligations in Live-in Relationships? 

• Maintenance Rights:  
  • As per judicial interpretations, women in live-in relationships are entitled to maintenance both under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and Section 125 of the CrPC, provided the relationship satisfies certain criteria akin to a marital relationship. 
• Property Rights:  
  • While there is no automatic right to inheritance for live-in partners, the Supreme Court in Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal (2010) held that a live-in partner may have a right to the property acquired during the subsistence of the relationship if she has contributed to its acquisition. 
• Rights of Children:  
  • Children born out of live-in relationships have been accorded legitimacy and inheritance rights.  
  • In Tulsa v. Durghatiya (2008), the Supreme Court held that children born out of a live-in relationship cannot be termed illegitimate if the parents have lived under the same roof and cohabited for a considerable period. 
• Domestic Violence Protection:  
  • Women in live-in relationships are entitled to protection under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which includes the right to reside in the shared household, protection orders, and compensation. 

Conclusion 

The legal status of live-in relationships in India has evolved significantly through judicial pronouncements, based on constitutional principles and progressive interpretation of existing laws. While these relationships now enjoy certain legal protections, particularly under the Domestic Violence Act and through maintenance rights, the lack of comprehensive legislation continues to pose challenges. The recent Kerala High Court ruling, which excludes live-in partners from Section 498A of the IPC, highlights the ongoing legal complexities surrounding such relationships. As Indian society continues to evolve, there remains a need for more explicit statutory recognition to address the various legal aspects of live-in relationships comprehensively, balancing individual rights with societal norms.