LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIPS UNDER THE PURVIEW OF ‘PREVENTION OF WOMEN FROM

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, 2005’: A LEGAL STUDY

Indian Penal Code (4.4)

-Submitted by-

Jyotiringa Puzari
UID- SM0117025
BA.,LLB (Hons.)
2nd Year
4th Semester

Faculty In-Charge
Ms. Nikita Barooah

National Law University and Judicial Academy, Assam

Guwahati

1
 ABSTRACT

Live in relationships, also called as ‘cohabitation' is an alternative for marriage, by which two person of

same or different sex can live together without any legal rights against each other. With the rampant

impact of globalization and shadowing modernization in the society, there has been an exponential rise in

the emergence of live in relationships. Over the time, India has witnessed a drastic change in the way the

present generation perceives live-in relationships. Keeping in mind the growing cases of live-in

relationships, the Apex court has even declared that the couple living in such relationship may be treated

as husband and wife.

Domestic violence, which is deep rooted in Indian society, is one such problem which is also faced by the

women living in live-in relationships. Therefore, the Apex court has lain down that the provisions of the

‘Prevention of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005’ will also be applicable to the women living in

live-in relationships. The ‘Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005’, is considered to be the

first piece of legislation that, in having covered relations “in the nature of marriage”, provided legal

recognition to relations outside marriage.

The researcher in this paper has attempted from time to time to discuss and evaluate the court's judgments

and to find out what legal remedies are available to women facing domestic violence while living in

relationships. Also, the paper describes and highlights on how live-in relationships have emerged as a

trending concept in India and how judiciary approaches this issue legally.

Keywords: Domestic Violence, Judgement, Law, Live-in Relationships

2
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents Page No.

1. Introduction 4-6
1.1 Literature Review
1.2 Scope and Objectives
1.3 Research Questions
1.4 Research Methodology

2. The idea of Live-in Relationships 7-8

3. Background Of Domestic Violence Act And Live-In Relationship In India 9-10

4. Legal Status of Live-in Relationships in India 11-14

5. Guidelines To understand whether protection should be granted to women 14-17

in Live-in Relationships

6. Conclusion 18

Bibliography

3
 CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION

The institution of marriage appears to have been evolved with a view to discipline sexual relations and
ensure legitimacy of children and their intellectual and psychological development in a congenial
atmosphere. Marriage in the Indian society has been considered as a sacred bond since the Vedic period.
This concept of matrimony has continuously evolved with time. With the ever-changing society and
human psychology, the concept of marriage and relationship has also evolved. The upcoming generations
are considering relationships ever more liberally. One such concept of live-in relationships is being
adopted by numerous couples around the world. This is a relationship in the nature of marriage; yet differs
from it. Aimed at keeping away from the 'shackles' that has institutionalized the marriage, live-in
relationships have emerged as an independent outlook among people nowadays. This concept has slowly
paved its way in the Indian society as well. However, such relationships are treated as taboo by the Indian
society most at times. Although the legal status of live in relationships in India is unclear, the Supreme
Court has ruled that any couple living together for a long term will be presumed as legally married unless
proved otherwise. Thus the aggrieved live-in partner can take shelter under the Domestic Violence Act
2005, (abbreviated as PWDVA) which provides protection and maintenance and thereby grant the right of
alimony.

The Supreme Court in its judgements states that living together is a right to life and cannot therefore be
held illegally. The court also attempted to improve the conditions of women and children born in
relationships by defining their status under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, if the relationship is proven
to be "relationship in the nature of marriage." In its various judgments, the Supreme Court has evolved and
determined the legal status of live-in relationships in India. There is no separate legislation, however,
which sets out the provisions of living in relationships and gives this concept legality. In a recent case on
5th May 2015, the Bench of the Supreme Court of Justices Vikramajit Sen and A M Sapre dismissed a
petition from the Bollywood-based petitioner ' Z' claiming that the respondent could not claim a wife's
status as legally entitled to receive maintenance under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Court held that
a couple's cohabitation would lead to the presumption of a valid marriage, and if a relationship life breaks
down, the man is bound to pay the women maintenance.

In the landmark case of Indra Sharma V.K.V. Sarma1, the Court stated that such a relationship may last for
a long time and may result in a pattern of dependence and vulnerability, and an increasing number of such
relationships calls for adequate and effective protection, particularly for the woman and children born out
of that relationship. Of course, the legislature cannot promote pre-marital sex, although such relationships
are sometimes intensively personal and people can express their views for and against it. Thus the
1
2013 (14) SCALE 448
4
Parliament has to ponder over these issues, bring in proper legislation or make a proper amendment of the
Act, so that women and the children, born out of such kinds of relationships are protected, though such
relationship might not be a relationship in the nature of a marriage.

1.2 LITERATURE REVIEW

 K.I Vibhute, "P.S.A Pillai's CRIMINAL LAW", 13th Edition, LexisNexis

This edition of P.S.A Pillai’s Criminal Law covers all aspects of case laws, amendments, judgements and
other emerging trends in the field of criminal law in India. The book is primarily concerned with the
substantive offences incorporated in the Indian Penal Code, and also explains all relevant provisions of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
This book helped the researcher in formulating all the required relevant case studies and judgements
regarding the project topic.

1.3 SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this research project have been formulated below:

 To study on how the modern concept of live-in relationships have emerged and how far has it been
accepted by the society.
 To know about the legal status of such an affair and to discuss about the issue of protection of
women from domestic violence and other issues of such a relationship
 To study about the judicial approach and attitude to women in live-in relationships
 To study about PWDVA and other such legislations.

The scope of this research project lies in the area of study of women studies and the legal approach to
marriage and live-in relationships and further research on the issue of domestic violence and its
prevention. It mainly discusses about live-in relationships under the purview of Domestic Violence Act,
2005.

5
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Following are the research questions:

 What is the idea of live-in relationship and what is its legal status in India?
 How has overall protection been granted to women who are victims to domestic violence?
 What are the legislations put forward to restrict domestic violence of women in live-in
relationship?
 What are the landmark judgements that ruled in favour of granting women protection who are co-
partners in live-in relationships?

1.5 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The researcher conducted mixed type of methodology. Study design in this paper was cross sectional
where by data were collected at one point in time. The use of library sources, journals, articles and internet
sources has greatly supplemented the research. Various books pertaining to the subject have been
immensely helpful in guiding the research.

To ensure a quality study of the subject matter, the researcher collected the Secondary type of data.
Though primary data is very valuable and precious; still the importance of the secondary data cannot be
overlooked. So, the researcher collected secondary data through various books, articles, journals and
mostly from the internet sources.

6
 CHAPTER-2

THE IDEA OF LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIPS

“Live-in relationship” in simple terms is a relationship in which both partners enjoy their individual
freedom and live in a house together without being married to each other2. In a society based on traditional
values like India, live in relationship is a concept which still has to come out of its closet and gain full
recognition by a larger section of the society. Marriage has been considered to be forming the foundation
of the society and governing all heterosexual relations in the society for a prolonged period of time and
this informal setup of a live in relationship seems to be challenging the basic tenets of marriage as a
sacrosanct institution. The recognition of a relationship entered into by two adults, without the sacrament
of marriage is considered to be a taboo and has a social stigma attached to it. However this seems to be
changing now and this can even be seen in the verdicts given by learned judges that recognize the nature
of such relationships.

3
A live-in relationship is the relationship of two adults of sound mind without entering into a legal or
formal relationship of marriage. Such a relationship is usually recognized by cohabitation which may or
may not be accompanied by sexual relations. In such a relationship there may be moral and personal
obligations decided mutually by the couple but there are fewer legal obligations. This is especially in the
case of India, which unlike countries like France (where live in relationships are governed by a solidarity
Pact where couples contract to live together and mutually decide upon consequent rights) and Canada
where people can enter into a common law relationship which is a counterpart to an Indian live in and can
later evolve the same into a marriage contract). Registration of live in relationships is even compulsory in
some countries such as these. However this is not true in the Indian context. In order to understand live in
relationship as an emerging concept, it is essential to classify it into various types.

This type of living in relationship is characterized by the couple having complete knowledge of the
consequences of living together as a couple without marital status or legal recognition and entering the
same through their free will providing an element of voluntariness to this relationship. This is common in
major Indian metros such as Mumbai, Delhi and Bangalore where couples prefer to live together to
increase cost efficiency and use this time as a pre-marriage trial period. Since this relationship is based
primarily on deriving mutual material benefits, it is perceived by law in a fictitious way.

2
Rebecca Furtado, “Rights Of Child Born Out Of A Live-in Relationship”, (https://blog.ipleaders.in/rights-
child-born-live-relationship/), last accessed on 1st May, 2019.
3
Enakshi Jha, “ Status of Children born in Live In Relationships”
LegalServicesIndia, (http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/1622/Status-of-Children-born-in-Live-in-
Relationships.html) last accessed on 1st May, 2019
7
Another type of relationship is characterized by its involuntary aspect and may occur if the man or woman
is led to believe that the man is unmarried, divorced or widowed and married to him. Bigamy laws
however, prevent recognition of this second marriage. The relationship that survived thus becomes a
living-in nature. A similar situation occurs when the marriage is fake or invalid and the couple is still
living together. Such a live-in relationship is thus involuntarily entered into. It is important to note this
difference as Courts and lawmakers now look to make laws to protect partners, especially women caught
in circumstantial live-ins. But this often leads to misuse of these very laws by partners in relationships of
choice. The challenge thus lies in balancing these opposite interests while framing laws.

Live in relationship is an aspect of a westward looking India society which has still not attained
recognition and consequently, there are no laws dealing with the legality of such a relationship per se. It
can be defined as, “an arrangement of living under which the couples which are unmarried live together to
conduct a long-going relationship similarly as in marriage.”

It is a de-facto non-marital heterosexual relationship; a form of inter-personal status legally recognized in

some jurisdictions as a marriage even though no legally recognized marriage ceremony is performed or
civil marriage contract is entered into or the marriage registered in a civil registry. 4

4
Shoma A. Chatterji, “Women in Perspective-Essays on Gender Issues”; 168 (2010) Vistas Publishing
8
 CHAPTER-3

BACKGROUND OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT AND LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP IN INDIA

The report of the Malimath Committee on the Protection of Women was recommended, and even in
accordance with Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, a man who marries a second wife
during the lifetime of the first wife should not escape his responsibility for the maintenance of his second
wife5. In addition to the maintenance under personal law, Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 also provides for the maintenance of the second wife. Women may seek additional maintenance
other than the maintenance they receive under any other law pursuant to Section 20(1)(d) of the Domestic
Violence Act (DV Act, 2005)6.

The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, has been enacted to provide a remedy in
Civil Law for protection of women from being victims of domestic violence and to prevent occurrence of
domestic violence in the society. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, has been
enacted to provide an effective protection of the rights of women guaranteed under the Constitution, who
are victims of violence of any kind occurring within the family. The Protection of Women from Domestic
Violence Act, 2005, has been enacted to uphold the constitutional principles laid down in Article 15(3),
reinforced vide Article 39 of the Constitution of India for protection of women in India. The Protection of
Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, recognizes the right of a woman to live in violence free home
and provides legal remedies if this right is violated. The Legal remedies pertain to civil reliefs such as
injunctions, protection order, compensation, custody order and monetary relief or compensation.
However, the Act does not provide for arrests made on a complaint filed except when the accused has
violated a court order or continues to commit violence7.

The objective of the Act is to provide civil law relief to the woman without dependence on the police to
initiate action. This Act is not a criminal Act law. A Woman can file the complaint and it would be put in
the Domestic Incidence Report (DIR) format which shall be sent to the Magistrate.

Live-in relationships are still considered beyond the pale in India. But, in a country where parents
sometimes even murder their children for marrying out of caste, many brave couples do live together
without getting married. They face social opprobrium and many legal hurdles. A couple intending to live
together should be prepared for ‘everything’. Despite live-in having mushroomed in India for years,
parents prefer to live in denial. Families cringe at the idea of live-ins because it hints at sex for recreation
instead of for procreation, which marriage implies. They see marriage as commitment while live-ins as

5
“Live-in Relationships and Protection from Domestic Violence for Women in India”,
(https://advocatechenoyceil.com/2014/08/17/live-in-relationships-and-protection-from-domestic-violence-for-
women-in-india/) last accessed on 1st May, 2019.
6
Ibid
7
Supra note 2
9
abstinence from responsibility. Often it is assumed that in future the man would shirk and the blind-in-
love woman who had been led into such an ignoble union shall cry her eyes out, for which other man shall
accept her thereafter? This assertion of choice by a woman insults those who believe that the woman is to
be given away through ‘kanyadan’.

Live-in relationships, in simple terms can be understood as a relationship in the nature of marriage where
both partners enjoy individual freedom and live in a shared household without being married to each
other. It involves continuous cohabitation between the parties without any responsibilities or obligations
towards one another. There is no law tying them together and consequently either of the partners can walk
out of the relationship, as and when, they will to do so. There is no legal definition of live in relationship
and therefore the legal status of such type of relationships is also unsubstantiated. The Indian law does not
provide any rights or obligations on the parties in live relationship. The status of the children born during
such relationship is also unclear and therefore, the court has provided clarification to the concept of live in
relationships through various judgments. The court has liberally professed that any man and women
cohabiting for a long term will be presumed as legally married under the law unless proved contrary.

The right to maintenance in live in relationship is decided by the court in accordance with the Domestic
Violence Act, 2005, and the individual facts of the case. Though the common man is still hesitant in
accepting this kind of relationship, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, provides
for the protection and maintenance thereby granting the right of alimony to an aggrieved live-in partner.8

8
Supra note 3
10
 CHAPTER-4

LEGAL STATUS OF LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIPS IN INDIA

There exist no law which directly recognizes the live-in' relationship; however two legal moves have
brought such relationship (i.e. the non-marital heterosexual relations) into sharp focus in India during the
last decade. First, in 2008, the Maharashtra Government's attempt to amend Section 125 of the Criminal
Procedure Code (hereinafter referred as Cr.P.C.) brought this issue to the fore. 9The amendment sought to
broaden the definition of the term “wife” in Section 125 Cr.P.C. The Committee sought to extend the
definition of ‘wife’ in Section 125 C.r.P.C. by recommending ‘to include a woman who was living with
the man as his wife for a reasonably long period, during the subsistence of the first marriage’. This move
followed the recommendations of the Malimath Committee (2003). In 2008, through the Malimath
Committee of Maharashtra Government's recommendations launched an aborted attempt to amend Section
125 Cr. P.C which brought into the public gaze the issue of the legal status of' live-in' relations. The move
was construed as an attempt to confer legal status on men's secondary unions as well as to legalize the'
live-in' relationships in which young men and women choose to enter heterosexual' non-marital'
relationships before entering into a long-term nuptial ties.

Secondly10 the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (hereinafter referred as PWDVA) 2005,
is considered to be the first piece of legislation that, is having covered relations ‘in the nature of marriage’,
provided a legal recognition to relations outside marriage. The Act defines a ‘domestic relationship’ as ‘a
relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point of time, lived together in a shared
household, when they are related by consanguinity, marriage, or through a relationship in the nature of
marriage, adoption or are family members living together as a joint family’. This does not imply that the
Act deals in a comprehensive manner with all forms of domestic relations. It excludes a male employer's
domestic relationship with a live-in domestic worker. The Act also clearly has no space for adult ‘same-
sex’ relationships. Nevertheless, it can be construed that, unlike the recommendations of the Malimath
Committee, the PWDVA, 2005 has implications for a broader terrain of non-marital relations, as it does
not explicitly limit itself to the secondary relations of men. In having used the idea of “relations in the
nature of marriage”, the Act seems to have widened the scope of legally recognized domestic relationships
between men and women.

None of the marriage statutes, such as the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955, the Special Marriage Act of 1954,
the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act of 1936, and the Christian Marriages and Divorce Act of 187220,
directly recognize the relationship "live-in." The 2005 Women's Protection from Domestic Violence Act is
considered to be the first legislation to recognize a person's right to protection in "relationship in marriage

9
“Maharashtra to Legalize `live-in' Relationships”, Times of India,[October 09, 2008]
10
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
11
nature". Living together for a long time, however, was considered a presumption of marriage until certain
facts prove otherwise under Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

11
The first case in which the Supreme Court of India first recognized the live in relationship as a valid
marriage was that of Badri Prasad vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation12, in which the Court gave legal
validity to the a 50 year live in relationship of a couple. The Supreme Court of India has taken a step
further by giving landmark judgments particularly in the year 2010 which provides some clarity to the
stand of such relationships in Indian context through the judgements of Justice Markandey Katju and TS
Thakur.

As laid down in the D. Velusamy v D. Patchaiammal13 case, the Supreme Court of India has laid down 4
conditions for a live in relation to assume the status of marriage subsequently resolving numerous disputes
associated with such assumption-

(a) “The couple must hold themselves out to society as being akin to spouses.

(b) They must be of legal age to marry.

(c) They must be otherwise qualified to enter into a legal marriage, including being unmarried.

(d) They must have voluntarily cohabited and held themselves out to the world as being akin to spouses
for a significant period of time, and in addition the parties must have lived together in a ‘shared
household’ as defined in Section 2(f) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Merely spending weekends together or a one night stand would not make it a ‘domestic relationship’.

14
According to Article 21 of Indian Constitution, the fundamental right guarantees all its citizens the "right
to life and personal freedom" and, taking this into account, living in relationship may be immoral in the
eyes of the conservative Indian society, but it is not "illegal" in law. In the case of S. Khushboo vs
Kanniammal15, the South Indian actress, Khushboo who endorsed pre-marital sex and live-in
relationships, 22 criminal appeals were filed against her in which the Supreme Court quashed saying that
how can it be illegal if two adults live together, in their words "living together cannot be illegal."

The Supreme Court on 13 August 2010 in the case of Madan Mohan Singh & Ors v Rajni Kant &
Anrs16 has once again entered the debate on legality of the Live-in Relationship. The Delhi High Court in

11
Enakshi Jha, “ Status of Children born in Live In Relationships”
LegalServicesIndia, (http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/1622/Status-of-Children-born-in-Live-in-
Relationships.html) last accessed on 1st May, 2019
12
1978 AIR 1557, 1979 SCR (1) 1
13
(2010) 10 SCC 469
14
(http://ijlljs.in/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/live-in-relationship.pdf), last accessed on 1st May, 2019.
15
MANU/SC/0310/2010
16
(2010) 9 SCC 209
12
its decision on 10 August 2010, in Alok Kumar v State17 while dealing with the validity of live in
relationship held that- “Live-in relationship’ is a walk-in and walk-out relationship. There are no strings
attached to this relationship, neither this relationship creates any legal bond between the parties. It is a
contract of living together which is renewed every day by the parties and can be terminated by either of
the parties without consent of the other party and one party can walk out at will at any time.”

In Tulsa vs. Durghatiya18, the Supreme Court reiterated the rule that there would be a presumption of
marriage when there has been long cohabitation. Hence, there is a long list of judgments which have
favoured a presumption of marriage over that of “concubinage” thereby reflecting strong conviction of
judiciary to help such hapless women. As such, one can contend that the Indian legal system does not
always seek strict evidence regarding the validity of a marriage in the face of other circumstantial
evidence that indicates the existence of “a relation in the nature of marriage”.

Keeping into consideration the vulnerable position of women who enter into such relationship willingly or
unwillingly, the courts have delivered far reaching judgments. For instance, Allahabad High Court held
that a major man and woman can stay together without getting married if they want and this is not
illegal19.

In Lata Singh vs. U.P20. state, the Apex Court observed that a live-in relationship between two consenting
adults of heterogeneous sex is not an offense (with the obvious exception of' adultery'), although it may be
perceived as immoral. A ‘major’ girl is free to marry someone she likes or "live with someone she likes."

Again in Chellamma vs. Tillamma, the Supreme Court gave the' live-in' relationship partner the status of
wife. J. Katju and J. Mishra said that, in their opinion, a man and a woman can live together if they wish,
even without getting married. Society may consider this immoral, but it is not illegal. Between law and
morality there is a difference. The bench went one step ahead and observed that it would be called
legitimate for the children born to such a parent. They have the rights in the property of their parent as
well.

It is thus obvious that non-marital relationship do not have a ‘criminal’ or ‘illegal’ status in India insofar
as they do not amount to ‘adultery’ and insofar as the principle of ‘presumption of marriage’ prevails and
this is not a new trend. However, this cannot be construed that courts promotes such relationships rather
the law traditionally has been biased in favor of marriage. It reserves many rights and privileges to
married persons to preserve and encourage the institution of marriage. It appears to be implying that the

17
2009(1) JCC 260
18
(2008) 4 SCC 520.
19
Kushal Singla, "LIVE IN RELATIONSHIP AND LEGITIMACY OF CHILDREN:
JUDICIAL ATTITUDE", International Journal of Law and Legal Jurisprudence Studies: ISSN:2348-8212
(Volume 2 Issue 2 )
20
(2006) 5 SCC 475
13
scope of the term “live-in relationship” is much broader than that of “relationship in the nature of
marriage”21.

CHAPTER-5

GUIDELINES TO UNDERSTAND WHETHER PROTECTION SHOULD BE GRANTED

TO WOMEN IN LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIPS

In Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma22, the Supreme Court has illustrated five categories where the concept
of live in relationships can be considered and proved in the court of law. Following are the categories:

 Domestic relationship between an adult male and an adult female, both unmarried. It is the most
uncomplicated sort of relationship.

 Domestic relationship between a married man and an adult unmarried woman, entered knowingly.

 Domestic relationship between an adult unmarried man and a married woman, entered knowingly.
Such relationship can lead to a conviction under Indian Penal Code for the crime of adultery.

 Domestic relationship between an unmarried adult female and a married male, entered
unknowingly.

 Domestic relationship between partners belonging to the same gender (gay or lesbian).

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pinakin Mahipatray Rawal v. State of Gujarat23 held that marital
relationship means the legally protected marital interest of one spouse to another which include marital
obligation to another like companionship, living under the same roof, sexual relation and the exclusive
enjoyment of them, to have children, their up-bringing, services in the home, support, affection, love,
liking and so on. In D. Velusamy v. D.Patchaimmal24, the SC held that whether a relationship in the
nature of marriage akin to a common law marriage between a male and female partner as provided under
Section 2(f) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the following conditions

21
Ibid, (pg.11)
22
2013 (14) SCALE 448
23
(2013) 2 SCALE 198.
24
(2010) 10 SCC 469
14
must be met in addition to proof of the fact that parties had lived together in a shared household as defined
in Section 2(s) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005:

 The couple must hold themselves out to society as being akin to spouses.
 They must be of legal age to marry.
 They must be otherwise qualified to enter into a legal marriage, including being unmarried
 They must have voluntarily cohabited and held themselves out to the world as being akin to
spouses for a significant period of time.

KINDS OF RELATIONSHIPS (LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIPS) THAT ARE CONSIDERED BY THE

COURT TO BE IN THE NATURE OF MARRIAGE AS DEFINED UNDER SECTION 2(f) OF THE
‘PWDVA’:

Duration of the Relationship Period: Section 2(f) of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 used the
expression at any time, which means a reasonable period of time to maintain and maintain a relationship
that may vary from case to case, depending on the circumstances of the case.

Shared Household: The expression has been defined under Section 2(s) of PWDVA, the term ‘shared
household’ means- a household where the person aggrieved lives or at any stage has lived in a domestic
relationship either singly or along with the respondent and includes such a household whether owned or
tenanted either jointly by the aggrieved person and the respondent, or owned or tenanted by either of them
in respect of which either the aggrieved person or the respondent or both jointly or singly have any right,
title, interest or equity and includes such a household which may belong to the joint family of which the
respondent is a member, irrespective of whether the respondent or the aggrieved person has any right, title
or interest in the shared household.

Pooling of Resources and Financial Arrangements Supporting: Pooling of Resources and Financial
Arrangements Supporting each other, or any one of them, financially, sharing bank accounts, acquiring
immovable properties in joint names or in the name of the woman, long term investments in business,
shares in separate and joint names, so as to have a long standing relationship, may be a guiding factor.

Domestic Arrangements: Entrusting the responsibility, especially on the woman to run the home, do the
household activities like cleaning, cooking, maintaining or up keeping the house, etc. is an indication of a
relationship in the nature of marriage.

Sexual Relationship: Marriage like relationship refers to sexual relationship, not just for pleasure, but for
emotional and intimate relationship, for procreation of children, so as to give emotional support,
companionship and also material affection, caring etc.

15
Children: In the nature of marriage, having children is a strong indication of a relationship. Therefore,
parties intend to maintain a long-standing relationship. Sharing the responsibility for bringing up and
supporting them is also a strong indication.

Socialization in Public: Holding out to the public and socializing with friends, relations and others, as if
they are husband and wife is a strong circumstance to hold the relationship is in the nature of marriage.

Intention and Conduct of the Parties: Common intention of parties as to what their relationship is to be
and to involve, and as to their respective roles and responsibilities, primarily determines the nature of the
relationship. If the woman enters into a live-in-relationship with the respondent knowing that he was
married person, with wife and two children, then she cannot claim protection under Protection of Women
25
from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. If there has been alienation of affection created in the life of the
respondent then the woman cannot claim protection under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence
Act, 2005. If the woman has tried to alienate respondent from his family, resulting in loss of marital
relationship, companionship, assistance, loss of consortium etc., so far as the legally wedded wife and
children of the respondent are concerned, who resisted the relationship from the very inception then the
woman cannot claim protection under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Marriage
and family are social institutions of vital importance. Alienation of affection, in that context, is an
intentional tort.

There would be presumption in favor of wedlock where the partners lived together for a long time as
husband and wife. The presumption, however, was rebuttable, but the person who seeks to deprive the
relationship of legal origin to prove that there was no marriage lies a heavy burden. Law relies on bastardy
for legitimacy and frowns.

Though in Gokal Chand v. Parvin Kumari26 the Supreme Court of India held that continuous
cohabitation of man and woman as husband and wife may raise the presumption of marriage, but the
presumption which may be drawn from long cohabitation is a rebuttable one and if there are
circumstances which weaken and destroy that presumption, the Court cannot ignore them.

Polygamy, which is a relationship or practice of having more than one wife or husband at the same time,
or a relationship by way of a big marriage that marries someone while already married and/or has an
adulterous relationship that has a voluntary sexual relationship between a married person and someone
who is not a husband or wife, cannot be said to be a relationship in that nature of marriage.

25
Supreme Court frames guidelines for determining live-in relationship,
(http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/supreme-court-frames-guidelines-for-determining-live-in-relationship-
542956), last accessed on 1st May, 2019.
26
AIR 1952 SC 231.
16
27
Long standing relationship as a concubine, though not a relationship in the nature of a marriage, of
course, may at times, deserves protection because that woman might not be financially independent, but
we are afraid that Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 does not take care of such
relationships which may perhaps call for an amendment of the definition of Section 2(f) of the Protection
of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which is restrictive and exhaustive. The Court stated in
Indra Sarma v. V.K.V.Sarma, that a live-in relationship will fall within the expression 'relationship in the
nature of marriage' under Section 2(f) of the Protection of women Against Domestic Violence Act, 2005
and provided certain guidelines to get an insight of such relationships. In this case, the appellant
admittedly entered into a relationship with the respondent despite of knowing that the respondent was a
married man with two children born out of the wedlock who opposed the live in relationship since the
inception.

So, we have seen that the right of maintenance is available to wives under all personal laws in India.
However, none of the religions recognises and accept live-in relationships. Since no remedy is granted to
women involved in a live-in relationship, Indian Courts have widened the scope of maintenance under the
Criminal Procedure Code.

Therefore, Section- 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code has been provided to give a legal right of
maintenance to lady partners in or out of a marriage. In Abhijit Bhikaseth Auti v.State of Maharashtra
and Others28 on 16.09.2009, the SC also observed that it is not necessary for woman to strictly establish
the marriage to claim maintenance under sec. 125 of Cr.P.C. A woman living in a relationship may also
claim maintenance under Sec.125 CrPC.

The Domestic Violence Act was enforced as an attempt to protect women from abusive (physical, mental,
verbal or economic) marital relationships. However, as per Section- 2 (f), it not only applies to a married
couple, but also to a ‘relationship in nature of marriage’. Framing guidelines for determining live-in
relationships, the bench observed that the pooling of financial and domestic arrangements, responsibility,
sexual relationships, child-bearing, public socialization and parties ' intention and conduct are some of the
other criteria to be considered in determining the nature of relationships between parties. For the duration
of the relationship, the bench said section 2(f) of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 used the phrase "at any
point of time," meaning a "reasonable period of time to maintain and maintain a relationship that may vary
from case to case depending on the situation."

Therefore, considering all this even the Supreme Court in a couple of cases has allowed live-in
relationships to be covered within the ambit of the law specified. Such relationships, calls for adequate
and effective protection, especially to the woman and children born out of that live-in relationships.

27
Indra Sarma v. V.K.V Sarma; Criminal Appeal No. 2009 of 2013 (SLP No. 4895 of 2012).
28
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2218 OF 2007
17
 CHAPTER-6

CONCLUSION

Since violence against women occurs mostly in the family's private spheres, it is urgent to address the
state's role in providing women with need-based policy provisions so that justice can easily be within their
reach. In India, a major breakthrough in this direction was the 2008 Bell-Bajao Campaign in which T.V.,
radio, online and print media were employed to circulate society's catchy calls for action in the event of
domestic violence. The Indra Sarma case, was a major breakthrough for women suffering from domestic
violence in live-in relationship because in this case, the women residing in live-in relationship were given
the status equivalent to that of wife i.e. she can be benefitted from the Protection of Women from
Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

Even the report of the Malimath Committee had recommended that, pursuant to section 125 of the 1973
Code of Criminal Procedure, a man who marries a second wife during the first wife's subsistence should
not escape his responsibility to keep his second wife. Following this case, the Indian Apex Court set out in
a number of judgments the provisions establishing the status of women in live-in relationships and clearly
stated that the provisions of the 2005 Domestic Violence Act on the Protection of Women also apply to
women in live-in relationships. Now the responsibility is on Parliament to declare the laws on the
concerned subject and address the issue at the earliest.

It is perilous to remember that with the evolution of society, the law needs to be changed and reformed.
Although some verdicts given by different courts have recognized live-in relationships, the exact opposite
has been done by an equal number of judgments. It is therefore up to the law to take a firm stand on this
emerging form of a relationship whose pace is enhanced by India's booming economy and culture
modernization. Once this is addressed, it is necessary to properly analyze the key issue of the impact of
living-in relationships on children. Clear laws should be made to avoid all these confusions and loopholes,
and amendments to the ambiguous terms in current laws should be made.

Though there are no specific personal laws governing these relationships. However, the Supreme Court is
trying to bring in a change and is trying to widen the legal prospect relevant to this foreign concept.

18
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bare Acts/ Statutes:

Articles:

-in Relationship”

,"LIVE IN RELATIONSHIP AND LEGITIMACY OF CHILDREN: JUDICIAL

ATTITUDE", International Journal of Law and Legal Jurisprudence Studies

-In Relationships in India Accorded Legal Status”

Books:

MINAL LAW", 13th Edition, LexisNexis

Gaur, K.D, ‘Criminal Law- Cases and Materials’, 7th Edition, LexisNexis

Saxena, R.N, ‘INDIAN PENAL CODE’, Central Law Publications

Websites:

-content/uploads/2015/03/live-in-relationship.pdf

-to-get-into-a-live-in-relationship-here-are-the-rights-you-
need-to-know/

s.com/index2.php?option=com_content&itemid=1&do_pdf=1&id=16506

http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/supreme-court-frames-guidelines-for-determining-live-in-
relationship-542956

19