Indra Sarma vs V.K.V. Sarma

Case Summary: Indra Sarma vs V.K.V. Sarma

Citation: (2013) 11 SC CK 0091 | AIR 2014 SC 309

Case No: Criminal Appeal No. 2009 of 2013 (Arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 4895 of 2012)

Date of Decision: 26 November 2013

Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.S. Panicker Radhakrishnan and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose

Final Decision: Appeal Dismissed

[Judgment Source] https://www.courtkutchehry.com/Judgement/Search/AdvancedV2?docid=299322

Law Points Raised:

• Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – Section 2(f), Section 3, Sections 12, 18–23 – Scope of relief for women in live-in relationships.
• Constitution of India – Articles 14, 15(3), 21, 39 – Gender equality, personal liberty, and social justice considerations.
• Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 498A, 304B – Harassment and dowry-related implications.
• CrPC – Section 125 – Maintenance obligations and eligibility.
• Concept of 'relationship in the nature of marriage' – Tests and judicial interpretation post-Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal.

Ratio Decidendi:

• Live-in relationships are not inherently unlawful but must meet certain criteria to qualify as 'relationship in the nature of marriage'.
• A woman knowingly entering into a relationship with a married man cannot claim maintenance under the DV Act.
• The tests laid down in the Velusamy case were not met; cohabitation alone is not enough.
• The scope of Section 2(f) of the DV Act is to protect women in marriage-like relationships, but not where legal impediments (like existing marriage) exist.

Final Ruling:

• The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the High Court’s view that the relationship did not amount to a marriage-like relationship.
• Relief under the DV Act was denied as the appellant entered the relationship knowing the respondent was already married.
• The judgment reasserted that only relationships satisfying key parameters of marriage-like arrangements are protected under the DV Act.

Relevant Paragraph Highlights:

• Para 2–3: Nature of the relationship and background.
• Para 5–7: Allegations and findings by the trial and appellate courts.
• Para 8: High Court's reversal and reasoning.
• Para 10–11: Amicus and respondent's submissions with reference to global and domestic law.
• Para 14–16: Court’s detailed examination of the purpose and scope of the DV Act.

Conclusion:

This landmark judgment clarifies the legal framework governing live-in relationships under the Domestic Violence Act. The Supreme Court stressed that women in such relationships are not automatically entitled to protection unless the relationship fulfills essential features of a marriage-like union. The ruling underlines the importance of legal qualification and intent in determining rights under personal and protective laws.

[Judgment Source] https://www.courtkutchehry.com/Judgement/Search/AdvancedV2?docid=299322