K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE
INDRA SARMA – Appellant
Versus
V. K. V. SARMA – Respondent
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J. — Leave granted.
2. Live-in or marriage like relationship is neither a crime nor a sin though socially unacceptable in this country. The decision to marry or not to marry or to have a heterosexual relationship is intensely personal.
3. We are, in this case, concerned with the question whether a “live-in relationship” would amount to a “relationship in the nature of marriage” falling within the definition of “domestic relationship” under Section 2(f) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short “the DV Act”) and the disruption of such a relationship by failure to maintain a women involved in such a relationship amounts to “domestic violence” within the meaning of Section 3 of the DV Act.
FACTS:
4. Appellant and respondent were working together in a private company. The Respondent, who was working as a Personal Officer of the Company, was a married person having two children and the appellant, aged 33 years, was unmarried. Constant contacts between them developed intimacy and in the year 1992, appellant left the job from the above-mentioned Company and started living with the respondent in a shared household. Appellant’s f
Deoki Panjhiyara v. Shashi Bhushan Narayan Azad and Another (2013) 2 SCC 137.
Badri Prasad v. Director of Consolidation 1978 (3) SCC 527.
Gokal Chand v. Parvin Kumari AIR 1952 SC 231.
Lata Singh v. State of U.P. [AIR 2006 SC 2522].
Andrahennedige Dinohamy v. Wiketunge Liyanapatabendage Balshamy
Tulsa v. Durghatiya 2008 (4) SCC 520.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.