Supreme Court Says Cruelty Law Can Protect Women in Live-In Relationships Too

Live-in relationships are no longer unusual in India, especially in cities. Taking note of this changing social reality, the Supreme Court has ruled that women in certain live-in relationships can also seek legal protection against cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

A bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice N.K. Singh said the provision should not necessarily be limited only to legally married couples. It can also apply when a live-in relationship is similar to a marriage and there is an established intention between the partners to marry.

In simple terms, the court’s view is that the absence of a marriage certificate should not automatically leave a woman without protection if the relationship effectively functions like a marriage.

What was the case?

The ruling came while the Supreme Court was hearing an appeal against an April 18, 2025 order of the Karnataka High Court.

A man had approached the court seeking to quash a case filed against him by a woman who claimed that they had married in 2010. She alleged that he had hidden details about his earlier marriage and that he and his family members later harassed her for dowry and physically assaulted her.

The man, however, argued that he was never legally married to the woman. Therefore, according to him, Section 498A, which deals with cruelty by a husband or his relatives, could not be used against him.

The Supreme Court did not accept this argument at this stage. It said whether a valid marriage actually took place is something that can be examined during the trial. The allegations in the complaint were serious enough for the proceedings to continue.

Why does the ruling matter?

Section 498A was introduced in 1983, when live-in relationships were far less common and Indian society looked very different from today. The Supreme Court pointed out that laws cannot remain completely disconnected from changing social realities. Live-in relationships, the bench observed, have become a reality, particularly in urban India.

The court also stressed that cruelty does not suddenly become less serious simply because a couple is not formally married. If a woman is living in a relationship that closely resembles marriage, the purpose of a law meant to protect women from cruelty should not be defeated only because of the technical status of that relationship.

However, the judgment does not mean that every live-in relationship will automatically come under Section 498A. Courts will have to examine whether the relationship was genuinely “in the nature of marriage”, including factors such as the couple’s intention to marry.

The ruling is significant because it reflects how courts are attempting to interpret older laws in the context of changing relationships and modern social realities.