Madras High Court Advocates Wife Status for Women in Live-In Relationships
The Madras High Court has voiced deep concern over the rising prevalence of live-in relationships across India. Justice S Srimathy described this trend as a cultural shock to traditional Indian society. In a recent ruling, the judge emphasized that women in such arrangements often lack legal safeguards.
Court Highlights Lack of Protection for Women
Justice Srimathy pointed out that many women enter live-in relationships believing they are embracing modernity. However, they soon realize these relationships do not offer the same protections as marriage. The court observed that there is currently no legal framework to shield women in live-in setups. This leaves a section of women vulnerable to exploitation and mental trauma.
The judge stated clearly: "Live-in relationships are a cultural shock to Indian society, but they are happening widely everywhere." She added that women in these relationships should be granted the status of a wife. This move would ensure they receive rights similar to those in a marriage, even during turbulent times.
Case Background and Judicial Remarks
The court made these observations while dismissing an anticipatory bail application from a man accused of cheating a woman. He had promised to marry her but later backed out, claiming her character was not good. Justice Srimathy criticized this pattern, noting that men often adopt a modern stance in live-in relationships but then attack the character of their partners.
"The boys suddenly would take a stand accusing the character of the girls," the judge remarked. "While, in a live-in relationship, the boys would assume themselves to be modern, they slam the girls on their character for having a live-in relationship."
Legal Implications and Current Provisions
The court underscored that if marriage is not feasible, men must face legal consequences. Currently, protection for women in such scenarios is limited to Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). This section addresses fraudulently making a promise to marry without intent to fulfill it, to have sexual intercourse with a woman.
Justice Srimathy asserted: "Now, the only section that grants protection to women is under Section 69 of BNS, and the men ought to face the wrath of Section 69 of BNS." The ruling highlights the urgent need for broader legal reforms to protect women in evolving relationship dynamics.
