LexINDRA SARMA versus V.K.V. SARMA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
(2013] 14 S.C.R. 1019 INDRA SARMA v. V.K.V. SARMA (Criminal Appeal No. 2009 of 2013) NOVEMBER 26, 2013 [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, JJ.] Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 A B - ss. 2(f) and 3 - "Live-in relationship" - If would amount to a C "relationship in the nature of marriage" falling. within the definition of "domestic relationship" uls.2(f) - Failure to maintain a woman involved in such a relationship - If amounts to "domestic violence" within meaning of s.3 - Held: All live- in-relationships are not relationships in the nature of marriage D - On facts, appellant, an unmarried woman, entered into a live-in-relationship with respondent knowing that he was married person, with wife and two children, hence, the generic proposition that where a man and a woman are proved to have lived together as husband and wife, the law presumes that E they are living together in consequence of a valid marriage will not apply and, hence, . the relationship between the appellant and the respondent was not a relationship in the nature of a marriage, and the status of the appellant was that of a concubine - Relationship of appellant and respondent F had no inherent or essential characteristic of a marriage, and did not fall within the definition of "domestic relationship" u/ s.2(f) - Consequently, any act, omission or commission or conduct of the respondent in connection with that type of relationship, would not amount to "domestic violence" uls.3 - G If any direction is given to the respondent to pay maintenance or monetary consideration to the appellant, that would be at the cost of the legally wedded wife and children of the respondent, especially when they had opposed that 1019 H 1020 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 14 S.C.R. A relationship and have a cause of action against the appellant for alienating the companionship and affection of the husbat:1dl parent which is an intentional tort - International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 (ICCPR) - Art. 23 - Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 - Art.16. Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - s. 2(f) - Guidelines for testing under what circumstances, a live-in relationship will fall within the expression "relationship I in the nature of marriage" u/s.2(f) - Guidelines not exhaustive, C but definitely giving some insight into such relationships, viz. a) duration of period of relationship; b) shared household; c) pooling of resources and financial arrangements; d) domestic arrangements; e) sexual relationship; f) children; g) · socialization in public and h) intention and conduct of the parties. D Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - s. 2(a) & (f) - Held: The Act does not recognize the relationship of same sex (gay or lesbian). E Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - ss. 2(f) - Long standing relationship as a concubine, though not a relationship in the nature of a marriage, of course, may at times, deserve protection because that woman might not be financially independent - The DV Act does not take care of such relationships which may perhaps call for an F amendment of the definition of s.2(f) of the DV Act, which is restrictive and exhaustive - Parliament to ponder over these issues, bring in proper legislation or make a proper amendment of the Act, so that women and the children, born out of such kinds of relationships be protected, though those G types of relationship might not be a relationship in the nature of a marriage. Family Law - Marriage - Concept of - Held: Marriage, as a concept, is nationally and internationally recognized - H Entering into a marriage, therefore, either through the Hindu INDRA SARMA v. V.K.V. SARMA 1021 Marriage Act or the Special Marriage Act or any other A Personal Law, applicable to the parties, is entering into a relationship of "public significance", since marriage being a social institution, many rights and liabilities flow out of that legal relationship - The concept of marriage as a "civil right" has been recognised by various courts all over the world - 8 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - ss. 5 and 7. Family Law - Marriage and live-in relationship - Difference between -Held: A married couple has to discharge legally various rights and obligatons, unlike the case of persons having live-in relationship or, marriage-like C relationship or defacto relationship.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.