Cannot book girl's live-in partner under marital violence laws: Kerala HC in landmark judgement

The Kerala High Court's decision to exclude live-in partners from the scope of Section 498A of the IPC redefines legal interpretations of domestic violence and cruelty within non-marital relationships, potentially affecting future cases and legal frameworks.

Follow us:

Flickr

New Delhi: In a precedent-setting ruling with significant implications, the Kerala High Court has declared that a woman’s partner, not legally married to her, cannot be prosecuted under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for cruelty, including domestic violence.

What was the case?

The judgment was delivered after the court dismissed proceedings against the petitioner, who was the live-in partner of the complainant woman. Justice Badharudeen, who issued the ruling, emphasized that Section 498A of the IPC requires the presence of a legally recognized marital relationship to prosecute an individual for cruelty.

What did the Kerala high court order stated?

“The court is of the view that to attract an offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC, the essential element is subjecting a woman to cruelty by her husband or the husband’s relatives. The term ‘husband’ means a married man, a woman’s partner in marriage,” the order stated.

The court clarified that only a legally recognized marriage can confer the status of ‘husband’ to a man for the purposes of Section 498A. "Without a legal marriage, if a man becomes a woman’s partner, he will not be covered by the term ‘husband’ under Section 498A of IPC,” ruled Justice Badharudeen.

Only cruelty inflicted by husband can be booked 

This ruling came in the context of allegations that the petitioner mentally and physically harassed the woman from March 2023 to August 2023 while they were in a live-in relationship. The court noted that to constitute an offence under Section 498A, cruelty must be inflicted by the husband or his relatives.

What did the defence argued?

The counsel for the petitioner argued that since the relationship between the petitioner and the complainant was a live-in arrangement, without legal marriage, it does not attract the provisions of Section 498A. The defense referenced the precedent set in Unnikrishnan @ Chandu v. State of Kerala (2017) to support their argument.

Kerala High Court, Section 498A IPC, live-in partner, domestic violence, legal marriage, Justice Badharudeen, landmark judgment, Kerala High Court, Section 498A, live-in relationship, domestic violence law, legal marriage, cruelty, Justice Badharudeen, landmark ruling, Indian Penal Code