Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers    |     Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court    |     Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case    |     Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case    |     Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute    |     Paternity Established Through SSC and Appointment Order, Legal Obligation to Maintain Unmarried Daughter: Andhra Pradesh High Court    |     No Appeal Shall Be Heard Without Disputed Tax Deposit: Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutionality of Section 96(b) of the Cantonment Act, 2006    |     Parties Must Choose Peace Over Litigation: Calcutta High Court Denies FIR Quashing in Family Dispute, Highlights Mediation Option    |     Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Recruitment of 1091 Assistant Professors and 67 Librarians In Punjab Due to Procedural Flaws    |     Res Judicata Bars Reconsideration of Adoption Validity in Second Round of Litigation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court    |     Candidates who use a party’s symbol must be deemed members of that party: Kerala High Court Upholds Disqualification for Defection    |     Inconsistencies in Eyewitness Accounts and Lack of Forensic Certainty Lead to Acquittal: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case    |     Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Under Section 148 Due to Invalid Sanction by JCIT    |     Summons Under PMLA for Further Investigation Does Not Infringe Right Against Self-Incrimination: Telangana HC    |     Termination During Probation Is Lawful if Concealment of Criminal Case Is Proven: Allahabad HC    |     Disproportionate Fine Cannot Be Imposed for Recovery of 1 Liter of Country-made Liquor: Patna High Court    |     Prosecution failed to prove identity of remains and establish murder beyond reasonable doubt: Orissa High Court Acquit Ex-Husband    |     Despite 12 Injuries on the Victim, No Intention to Kill Found: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 304 Part-II IPC    |     Governor’s sanction suffers from non-application of mind: Karnataka High Court Stays Governor’s Sanction for Investigation Against CM Siddaramaiah    |    

Live-In Relationships Outside Valid Marriages Not Covered by Section 498A IPC: Kerala High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a groundbreaking verdict, the Kerala High Court, led by The Honourable Mrs. Justice Sophy Thomas, has ruled that live-in relationships without valid marriages do not fall within the purview of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The decision came in response to a Criminal Revision Petition challenging the conviction of the appellants for offenses under Sections 306 and 498A of IPC.

The High Court's observation, which forms the crux of this ruling, emphasized the importance of a valid marital relationship when applying Section 498A of IPC. The Court declared, "Even when a marriage was solemnized following the rituals, it may not be legal always, as the validity of a marriage depends on so many factors like age, mental status, religion, consanguinity, spouse living, etc. When there is some form of marriage either religious or customary which has the color of a legal marriage, then also, the woman can seek protection under Section 498A of IPC though later, for some reason as mentioned above, that marriage is found to be invalid in the eye of law."

The verdict underscores that the mere existence of a live-in relationship based on an agreement, without the validity of a legally recognized marriage, cannot be accepted as grounds for invoking Section 498A of IPC. The Court clarified that the legislation's intent was to prevent harassment of a woman who had entered into a marital relationship and later became a victim of greed for money. The ruling upheld that the concept of "husband" in Section 498A covers individuals who enter into a marital relationship, regardless of the legitimacy of the marriage.

Additionally, the High Court stressed the necessity for a positive act of harassment proximate to the time of occurrence to establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 of IPC. The Court ruled that the prosecution failed to prove its case against the revision petitioners beyond a reasonable doubt, leading to the acquittal of revision petitioners 1 and 4.

This landmark ruling has significant implications for cases involving allegations of cruelty and abetment of suicide in live-in relationships without valid marriages, setting a legal precedent in the state of Kerala.

Advocate Sri.K.P.Balagopal represented the Revision Petitioners, while Smt.Nima Jacob served as the Public Prosecutor for the Respondent/Complainant. The decision, based on meticulous legal analysis and jurisprudence, brings clarity to the applicability of Section 498A of IPC in live-in relationships.

Date of Decision: 12 October 2023

NARAYANAN VS STATE OF KERALA     

Similar News