Comprehension

Live-in relationship, as such, as already indicated, is a relationship which has not been socially accepted in India, unlike many other countries. In Lata Singh v. State of U.P. [(2006) 5 SCC 475: (2006) 2 SCC (Cri) 478] it was observed that a live-in relationship between two consenting adults of heterosexual sex does not amount to any offence even though it may be perceived as immoral. However, in order to provide a remedy in civil law for protection of women, from being victims of such relationship, and to prevent the occurrence of domestic violence in the society, first time in India, the DV Act has been enacted to cover the couple having relationship in the nature of marriage, persons related by consanguinity, marriages, etc. We have few other legislations also where reliefs have been provided to woman placed in certain vulnerable situations. Section 125 Cr.P.C. of course, provides for maintenance of a destitute wife and Section 498-A IPC is related to mental cruelty inflicted on women by her husband and in-laws. Section 304-B IPC deals with the cases relating to dowry death. The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 was enacted to deal with the cases of dowry demands by the husband and family members. The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 provides for grant of maintenance to a legally wedded Hindu wife, and also deals with rules for adoption. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 refers to the provisions dealing with solemnisation of marriage also deals with the provisions for divorce. For the first time, though, the DV Act, Parliament has recognised a “relationship in the nature of marriage” and not a live-in relationship simpliciter. We have already stated, when we examine whether a relationship will fall within the expression “relationship in the nature of marriage” within the meaning of Section 2(f ) of the DV Act, we should have a close analysis of the entire relationship invariably, it may be a question of fact and degree, whether a relationship between two unrelated persons of the opposite sex meets the tests judicially evolved.
(This extract is taken from Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma, (2013) 15 SCC 755)

Question: 1

What is the scope of analysis required to determine if a relationship falls within the expression “relationship in the nature of marriage” under Section 2(f) of the DV Act?

Updated On: Dec 3, 2024
  • Considering the number of children born in a live in relationship
  • Considering only the cohabitation period of the relationship and there emotional connectivity
  • Conducting a close analysis of the entire interpersonal relationship, taking into account all facets
  • Evaluating only the financial aspects and mutual agreements of the relationship, and if there is any written agreement between the partner
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

Under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, to determine whether a relationship is in the nature of marriage, the court must analyze the entire interpersonal relationship. This includes cohabitation, emotional bond, mutual responsibilities, and understanding between the parties. It is not limited to the duration of cohabitation or children alone but includes all dimensions of the relationship.

Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2

In which of the following case, the Supreme Court read down the word “adult male” in Section 2(q) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005?

Updated On: Dec 3, 2024
  • Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma
  • Hiral P. Harsora v. Kusum Harsora
  • Uma Narayan v. Priya Krishna Prasad
  • All of the above
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

In the case of Hiral P. Harsora v. Kusum Harsora, the Supreme Court interpreted the term “adult male” in Section 2(q) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and read it down to include both men and women in cases of domestic violence, recognizing the broader intent of the law to protect both genders from domestic abuse.

Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3

As per Section 20 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, while disposing of an application under Section 12(1), the Magistrate may direct the respondent to pay monetary relief to the aggrieved person so that the aggrieved person can:

Updated On: Dec 3, 2024
  • Live a life that meets at least the bare minimum needs for survival and basic well-being
  • Live a life that is consistent with her standard of living which she is accustomed
  • Live a life that is consistent with her parent’s standard of living
  • Live a life which can cover her medical expenses and expenses incurred due to litigation of domestic violence
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

Section 20 of the Domestic Violence Act allows the Magistrate to provide monetary relief to ensure that the aggrieved person can maintain a standard of living that is consistent with what they were accustomed to before the abuse. This reflects the law’s objective to ensure that the woman’s dignity is preserved and she is not left in a vulnerable financial state after the violence.

Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4

In which case, the three-judge bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has recently interpreted the term “shared household” and has held that “...lives or at any stage has lived in a domestic relationship...” have to be given its normal and purposeful meaning. The living of woman in a household has to refer to a living which has some permanency. Mere fleeting or casual living at different places shall not make a shared household?

Updated On: Dec 3, 2024
  • Rupa Chander Ahuja v. Sneha Ahuja
  • Satish Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra
  • S.R. Batra v. Tarin Batra
  • B.R. Mehta v. Atma Devi
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

In Satish Chander Ahuja v. Sneha Ahuja, the Supreme Court clarified the interpretation of the term “shared household” under the Domestic Violence Act. The Court emphasized that a shared household refers to a household where there is permanency, and mere transient or casual living is not sufficient to qualify as a shared household.

Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 5

Under Indian Law, can a woman in a live in relationship claim maintenance under S. 125, Cr.P.C. despite not being a legally wedded wife?

Updated On: Dec 3, 2024
  • No, as per the interpretation of statute “wife” means legally wedded wife and includes who has been divorced by, or has obtained a divorce from her husband
  • Yes, a woman in a live in relationship can claim maintenance u/s 125, Cr.P.C. as strict proof of marriage is not necessary and maintenance cannot be denied if evidence suggests cohabitation
  • A woman in live in relationship can only claim maintenance if she has been cohabiting for more than five years and dependent children from the relationship
  • A woman in live in relationship can claim maintenance only through a civil suit as the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDVA) does not apply to live in relationships
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code allows a woman in a live-in relationship to claim maintenance as long as she can provide evidence of cohabitation. It does not require a formal marriage certificate, recognizing the need to protect women who may not be legally married but have lived together in a domestic relationship.

Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Questions Asked in CLAT PG exam

View More Questions