Yes, in specific circumstances. The Supreme Court has held that Section 498A IPC's cruelty protection extends to live-in relationships that qualify as being "in the nature of marriage" between consenting adults, with intent to marry as an intrinsic part of the relationship. The ruling, in Dr. Lokesh B.H. & Ors. v. State of Karnataka & Anr. (2026), means a live-in partner can now potentially be prosecuted as a "husband" under this provision, not just a legally married spouse.
What did the Supreme Court actually hold?
A Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh held that Section 498A applies to live-in relationships that qualify as "relationships in the nature of marriage" between consenting adults, where the intent to marry is established as an intrinsic part of the relationship. Confining the word "husband" in Section 498A only to a legally married man, while excluding a live-in partner in this kind of relationship, was held to bear no rational nexus with the provision's purpose, offending Article 14's equality guarantee.
What makes a live-in relationship qualify?
Two elements: the relationship must genuinely bear the character of marriage, not just cohabitation, and there must be an established intent to marry between the parties as part of that relationship. Casual cohabitation or a relationship without that marital character and mutual intent isn't automatically covered by this extension.
Does this extend to the BNS or other provisions too?
The ruling specifically addresses Section 498A of the IPC, and the Court noted the extended interpretation was limited to that provision. The equivalent provision under the new criminal code is BNS Section 85; whether and how this ruling's reasoning carries over there is a developing question worth confirming with an advocate rather than assuming automatically.
What does this mean practically?
If you're in a live-in relationship that is genuinely marriage-like, with a shared intent to marry, the cruelty-law protections and consequences that previously applied only to legally married couples can now potentially apply to you as well, on either side of a dispute. Whether a specific relationship meets this standard is fact-dependent, and both complainants and accused should get advice specific to their situation. If you believe you're facing a false or exaggerated cruelty complaint specifically, see defending a false 498A FIR for the legal mechanisms available.
Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for your specific situation.
Frequently asked questions
Can a live-in partner be prosecuted for cruelty under Section 498A?
Yes, if the relationship qualifies as being 'in the nature of marriage' between consenting adults, with the intent to marry established as an intrinsic part of it. The Supreme Court held this in Dr. Lokesh B.H. & Ors. v. State of Karnataka & Anr. (2026), extending Section 498A's protection beyond legally married couples in these specific circumstances.
What is required for a live-in relationship to qualify?
The relationship must bear the attributes of marriage, and be between consenting adults with an established intent to marry as an intrinsic part of the relationship, not simply cohabitation or dating without that marital character and intent.
Why did the Supreme Court extend the law this way?
The Court held that confining the word 'husband' in Section 498A to a man in a legally valid marriage, while excluding a live-in partner in a marriage-like relationship, bears no rational nexus to the provision's purpose and offends Article 14 (the right to equality) of the Constitution.
Does this ruling affect other laws, like the BNS?
The Supreme Court's ruling is specifically about Section 498A of the IPC (now BNS Section 85), and the Court noted its extended interpretation was limited to that provision, not automatically read into every other provision that uses similar language elsewhere.
What should someone in a live-in relationship know about this ruling?
If your relationship is marriage-like in character, with a genuine mutual intent to marry, a live-in partner accused of cruelty can now potentially face the same cruelty-law consequences as a legally married spouse. Whether a specific relationship meets this standard is fact-dependent, and worth discussing with an advocate on either side of such a dispute.