Introduction
The Supreme Court's extension of domestic violence protections to live-in relationships under Section 2(f) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA), 2005, marks a pivotal shift from traditional orthodoxy towards constitutional morality. By acknowledging 'relationships in the nature of marriage', the judiciary has ensured that statutory protections evolve in tandem with shifting social norms.
Adapting Law to Changing Realities
- Constitutional Backing: Expanding protections reinforces Article 21 (right to dignity, privacy, and personal autonomy in partner choice) and Article 14 (equal civil protection against domestic abuse, irrespective of formal marital status).
- Structuring Informal Ties: To balance protection with safeguards against misuse, the Supreme Court in Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma formulated an 8-point guideline—assessing duration of cohabitation, shared household, pooling of financial resources, and domestic arrangements—to define relationships in the nature of marriage.
- Collateral Safeguards: Judicial evolution has extended civil remedies to children born out of such relationships, affirming their legitimacy (under Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act) and entitlement to maintenance (under Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, formerly Section 125 CrPC).
Current Gaps and Emerging Frameworks
- Dichotomy Between Civil and Penal Protections: While the PWDVA provides civil remedies and protection orders to female partners, penal cruelty provisions under Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (formerly Section 498A IPC) strictly require the existence of a legally wedded husband or his relatives.
- Legislative Interventions: Recent state measures, such as the Uttarakhand Uniform Civil Code (UCC), 2024, mandate the registration of live-in relationships, seeking to balance partner protection with legal accountability, though raising debates around privacy.
Conclusion
While the judiciary has actively filled legislative vacuums through progressive interpretation, piecemeal relief is insufficient. Parliament should enact a comprehensive and codified framework addressing both civil and penal facets of cohabitation to align legal certainty with evolving social realities.