Live-in Partner Entitled to Maintenance Under Domestic Violence Act, Even If Unaware of Man's Prior Marriage: Chhattisgarh High Court

Chhattisgarh High Court ruled that a woman in a live-in relationship with a married man is entitled to maintenance under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, if she was unaware of his prior marriage. The Court upheld the maintenance order of ₹4,000 per month for the woman and ₹2,000 for their child, dismissing the man's appeal.

The applicant (man) was in a live-in relationship with the respondent (woman) from 2015, leading to the birth of their child. The respondent sought maintenance under the Domestic Violence Act, alleging emotional and financial abuse. The applicant claimed that the relationship was not "in the nature of marriage" because he was already married and had children from his prior marriage.

The Judicial Magistrate had granted maintenance to the respondent and her child, a decision upheld by the appellate court. The applicant challenged this before the High Court, arguing that since the respondent was aware of his prior marriage, she could not claim maintenance under the Domestic Violence Act.

Whether the respondent, being in a live-in relationship with a married man, could claim maintenance under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

Whether the applicant's prior marriage disqualified the relationship from being recognized as "in the nature of marriage."

The Court emphasized that the respondent was unaware of the applicant's prior marriage. The applicant failed to produce evidence proving that she knew about his marital status. Citing Lalita Toppo vs. The State of Jharkhand, the Court held that a woman in such a live-in relationship is entitled to maintenance and additional reliefs, including a shared household, under the Domestic Violence Act.

The Court distinguished the case from Indra Sarma vs. V.K.V. Sarma, where the Supreme Court had ruled that a live-in relationship does not qualify for maintenance if the woman is aware of the man’s existing marriage. Here, the respondent’s lack of knowledge about the applicant's marital status placed the relationship within the ambit of "relationship in the nature of marriage."

The Chhattisgarh High Court upheld the maintenance order of ₹4,000 per month for the woman and ₹2,000 for their child. It ruled that the applicant’s prior marriage did not disqualify the respondent from seeking maintenance, given that she was unaware of his marital status.

The Chhattisgarh High Court reaffirmed the rights of women in live-in relationships under the Domestic Violence Act, especially when they are unaware of the man’s existing marriage. The Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal and maintained the original maintenance order.

Date of Decision: October 7, 2024​

XXX VS XXX