Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

Live-in Partner Not a "Relative" Under Section 498-A of IPC, Kerala High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the Kerala High Court delivered a landmark judgement on August 3rd, 2023, clarifying the interpretation of the term "relative" under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The ruling comes as a result of a Criminal Misc. Case (Crl.M.C. No. 5681 of 2021) brought before the court by Chandhini T.K, who was the 4th accused in Criminal Case No. 116/2020.

The case revolved around the accusation of cruelty against Chandhini T.K for her alleged involvement in a live-in relationship with the complainant's husband. The court, presided over by The Honourable Mr. Justice K. Babu, meticulously examined the legal definitions and nuances of the term "relative" as stipulated under Section 498-A of the IPC.

In its observation, the court stated, "By no stretch of imagination, a girlfriend or even a woman who maintains sexual relations with a man outside of marriage in an etymological sense would be a 'relative'. The word 'relative' brings within its purview a status. Such status must be conferred either by blood or marriage, or adoption. If no marriage has taken place, the question of one being relative of another would not arise." The court, therefore, emphasized that the term "relative" does not extend to a woman in a live-in relationship.

The judgement has far-reaching implications as it clarifies that a woman in a romantic or sexual relationship with a married man cannot be prosecuted under Section 498-A of the IPC. This interpretation of the term "relative" in the context of live-in relationships underscores the court's commitment to a strict construction of penal provisions.

The court's decision led to the quashing of the FIR and the final report against Chandhini T.K, reinforcing the principle that prosecution under Section 498-A of the IPC requires a specific status of relation conferred by blood, marriage, or adoption.

This ruling aligns with the evolving legal landscape surrounding relationships and marriage, providing clarity on the boundaries of prosecution under Section 498-A. The judgement also underscores the importance of judicial scrutiny in cases involving penal provisions, ensuring that statutes are interpreted in accordance with their precise legal definitions and intent.

Date of Decision: August 3rd, 2023

CHANDHINI. T.K vs STATE OF KERALA

 

Latest Legal News