The Karnataka High Court has ruled that Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with cruelty by a husband or his relatives, can be applied even to people who are in a live-in relationship. The court said the law also covers relationships that are void or voidable, meaning relationships that may not be legally valid as a marriage but still carry the attributes of one.
The judgment was delivered on November 18 by Justice Suraj Govindaraj. The judge explained that the word husband in Section 498A is not limited to a man in a legally valid marriage. According to the court, the term extends to anyone who enters into a relationship similar to marriage. This includes relationships that bear essential elements of a marriage even if they are not formally registered or legally recognised.
The decision came while hearing a petition filed by a man who sought to quash a cruelty case registered against him. The case was filed by his second wife. According to the complaint, the man had married a woman earlier and had a daughter with her. While still legally married to his first wife, he entered into another relationship in 2010. This second relationship continued until 2016. When it ended, the second woman filed a complaint accusing him of cruelty, dowry demands and physical violence. She also said that the man hid his first marriage from her.
The petitioner argued that the complaint under Section 498A should not stand because she was not his legally wedded wife. His lawyer, Advocate Harsha Kumar Gowda, submitted that Section 498A can only be used when there is a legally valid marriage. He said the man could not be charged because the woman was in a relationship with someone who was not free to marry due to his existing marriage. He argued that at most, the relationship was a live-in arrangement and therefore outside the scope of Section 498A.
The court rejected this argument. It said that accepting such a claim would lead to an unjust result because it would allow a man to escape liability simply by saying the marriage was invalid. The court explained that the intention behind Section 498A is to protect women from cruelty. The court said the provision is a social safeguard meant to uphold the dignity and safety of women. Therefore, the law must be interpreted in a way that supports its purpose rather than restricting it.
The judge stated that a man who leads a woman to believe that she is legally married to him and then subjects her to cruelty cannot avoid responsibility because the marriage is void. The court also said that if a couple lives together as husband and wife and the woman faces cruelty, she must receive protection under the law. The fact that the man hid his first marriage and made the woman believe their relationship was valid strengthens the need for protection.
The court pointed out that the relationship between the petitioner and the complainant displayed all the characteristics of a marriage. Their relationship had the nature of a marriage and resembled a live-in arrangement similar to a marital bond. Because the essential elements of a marital relationship were present, the court held that Section 498A would apply.
Justice Govindaraj emphasised that the focus should be on the substance of the relationship rather than its legal validity. He said that since Section 498A aims to address cruelty and social wrongs, it must be interpreted liberally. He added that this is especially important in cases where a woman believes the marriage is valid and only later learns that it is void. He said the man cannot be allowed to use the invalidity of the marriage as a defence to escape legal action.
With this judgment, the Karnataka High Court has made it clear that women in live-in relationships or void marriages can seek protection under Section 498A if they experience cruelty. The ruling is seen as a significant step in strengthening the legal rights of women who are vulnerable to deception and abuse in non-traditional or legally uncertain relationships.
