S. 498A to be applied on live-in partners; held SC
The Apex court on Monday, 3rd August held, Live-in relationships which resemble marriage if left without legal protection would amount to violation of Article 14
The court observed that excluding women in live-in relationships which are “in the nature of marriage” from the protection of Section 498A IPC would amount to discriminatory treatment, the Supreme Court held that a man in such a relationship can be prosecuted for domestic cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
AdvertisementThe Court however clarified that this ruling is applicable to "live-in relationships" which qualify as "relationships in the nature of marriage", where the intent to marry is established.
Provision 498A of IPC states that, if the husband or in-laws of husband of the wife, subjected to be inflicted mental or physical cruelty on wife, would about to punishment upto 3 years or with fine.
AdvertisementFor the purpose of this section, “cruelty” means— (a) Any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or (b) Harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.
Prior Judgement in the High Court
The bench made the aforesaid observation while upholding the Karnataka High Court's decision, which refused to quash proceedings for cruelty against the petitioner-husband, who claimed exemption from prosecution under Section 498A IPC, arguing that the provision is not applicable to live-in relationships.
Aggrieved by the High Court's decision, the husband filed an SLP before the Supreme Court
Refusing to interfere with the impugned findings, the judgment authored by Justice Karol held that since the purpose of Section 498A is to address cruelty and harassment inflicted upon women within domestic relationships, including conduct causing physical or mental injury or driving a woman to suicide, the cruelty does not become any less harmful merely because the parties are not formally married.
Precedents referred were; K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, (2017)10 SCC 1 and Shafin Jahan v. Asokan K.M., (2018) 16 SCC 368, wherein the Court observed that when the law grants individuals the freedom to choose their relationships, it cannot deny them legal protection because of the form that relationship takes.
AdvertisementThe apex court stress upon, a woman who chooses to live with her partner in a live-in relationship resembling marriage cannot be left without protection against cruelty merely because the relationship lacks formal legal recognition of a marriage.
Upholding the continuation of a trial against the petitioner-husband, the Court gave a purposive interpretation to the word "husband" under Section 498A IPC, holding that it includes a man in a relationship in the nature of marriage.
This means the provision applies to live-in relationships that qualify as "relationships in the nature of marriage" with the intent to marry being established as an intrinsic part thereof.
