Sangeeta Pachauri

Author name: Sangeeta Pachauri

Blog

A New Chapter In India’s Evolving Family Law

India’s social structure has been changing rapidly. Relationships that were once considered unconventional, including live-in relationships, are increasingly visible, particularly in urban India. Indian courts have consequently faced an important question: Should a woman lose legal protection against cruelty merely because her relationship does not have the formal stamp of marriage? The Supreme Court of India has recently provided an important answer. In its judgment dated 3 August 2026 in Dr. Lokesh B.H. & Ors. v. State of Karnataka & Anr., a Bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh held that the protection against cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code may extend to certain live-in relationships that qualify as relationships “in the nature of marriage.” (Indian Kanoon⁠) The ruling is significant because it recognises that domestic abuse does not necessarily begin or become less serious merely because two people have not formally married. What Did the Supreme Court Decide? Section 498A IPC was traditionally framed around cruelty by a “husband or relative of the husband.” The corresponding provision under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which replaced the IPC, is Section 85 BNS. The provision addresses cruelty against a woman and provides for imprisonment of up to three years along with a fine. (Supreme Court Cases⁠) The question before the Supreme Court was whether the word “husband” could, in appropriate circumstances, cover a man who is in a live-in relationship with a woman where that relationship is substantially similar to marriage. The Court answered in the affirmative. However, this does not mean that every live-in relationship automatically comes under Section 498A or Section 85 BNS. The Court specifically limited the principle to relationships that can genuinely be described as being “in the nature of marriage.” The judgment also recognised an intention to marry as an important element in determining whether the relationship falls within this category. (LawBeat⁠) Why Is This Judgment Important? The heart of the judgment lies in the idea of equality before law. The Supreme Court observed that the purpose of Section 498A is to protect women from serious forms of domestic cruelty, including conduct capable of causing grave physical or mental injury or driving a woman towards suicide, as well as harassment connected with unlawful demands for property or valuable security. If the law protects a woman from such cruelty after marriage but completely removes that protection merely because she and her partner have not formally married, the distinction may fail to serve the very purpose for which the law was created. The Court therefore examined the issue through the lens of Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law. (Live Law⁠) The judgment reflects a broader judicial principle: law cannot remain completely disconnected from changing social realities. Does This Mean Live-In Relationships Are Now Equal to Marriage? No. This is perhaps the most important clarification. The Supreme Court has not declared live-in relationships equivalent to marriage in every respect. The ruling specifically concerns the application of the anti-cruelty protection contained in Section 498A IPC, and its corresponding framework under Section 85 BNS. (Brut.⁠) The judgment does not automatically grant live-in partners every right or benefit available to legally married couples, such as all matrimonial, succession, inheritance or other marriage-specific rights. Therefore, the ruling should not be interpreted as saying: “A live-in relationship is legally the same as marriage.” Rather, its message is narrower but significant: The absence of a marriage certificate, by itself, cannot be used to deny a woman protection from domestic cruelty where the relationship genuinely possesses the characteristics of a marriage-like relationship. What Does “In the Nature of Marriage” Mean? This phrase is crucial. Not every relationship involving two people living together will necessarily qualify. Courts have historically examined factors such as the nature and duration of the relationship, shared household, the manner in which the couple presents themselves socially, the stability of the relationship and other surrounding circumstances while determining whether a relationship resembles marriage. The 2026 judgment adds particular importance to the intention to marry in determining whether the relationship falls within the protective scope of Section 498A. (LawBeat⁠) This means that the courts will still have to examine the facts of each individual case. A Move Towards Gender- and Status-Neutral Protection? The judgment also raises a larger question about how criminal law should respond to changing family structures. Historically, marriage provided the legal framework within which many protections against domestic cruelty operated. But relationships today do not always follow a single traditional model. The Supreme Court recognised live-in relationships as a social reality and emphasised that the law must respond to changing societal circumstances. (LawBeat⁠) This does not mean that the institution of marriage has lost its legal significance. Instead, it suggests that protection from violence and cruelty should not depend entirely upon formal marital status when the underlying relationship performs the functions and carries the characteristics of a family or marriage-like partnership. What About the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita? There is an important technical point. The Supreme Court judgment primarily interpreted Section 498A IPC, because that was the statutory provision involved in the case. However, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, which came into force in 2024, replaced the IPC. The corresponding provision is Section 85 BNS, which deals with cruelty by a husband or relative of the husband towards a woman. (Supreme Court Cases⁠) The judgment itself discusses Section 85 BNS, and legal commentary has treated the Court’s reasoning as highly relevant to the corresponding provision under the new criminal law framework. (Kamaraj IAS Academy in Chennai⁠) Nevertheless, the judgment should not be overstated: the Supreme Court expressly confined the proposition it laid down to the specific anti-cruelty provision rather than declaring a blanket rule for every area of law. (LawBeat⁠) Protection, Not a Blank Cheque An important aspect of the judgment is that legal protection does not mean that every allegation automatically results in criminal liability. The relationship must first satisfy the legal requirements identified by the Court. The facts surrounding

Blog

The Invisible Stigma

Life as a Single, Divorced Woman Divorce often described as the end of a marriage, but for women, it marks as the beginning of an entirely different life that includes a social stratification based on the woman’s relationship status. Breaking the stigma around single divorcee women is really an invisible battle. While laws today give recognition to the rights of a woman to seek divorce and legal remedies, the social attitudes lack behind. A divorcee woman rarely seen as someone who is suffering and has made a tough decision for her well-being and overall development . Instead, she is seen with the discriminatory eyes of pity, shame, suspicion and is usually blamed for taking her own stand . The marriage and the court proceedings may have ended but the social trial continues….. Over a divorcees shoulders, there are multiple responsibilities, she must look after her finances, child/children, job, home and many more aspects that are necessary for one’s livelihood. Apart from all these huge responsibilities to take care of alone, she is also expected to answer the intrusive questions of the society as well as the other fronts where she not on struggles emotionally, physically but also psychologically. The Weight of Unfair Assumptions A divorced woman is expected to explain herself in ways that a divorced man rarely is. People ask intrusive questions. “What went wrong?” “Couldn’t you adjust?” “Was it your fault?” Behind these questions lies a harmful assumption: that preserving a marriage is solely a woman’s responsibility. This mindset ignores the reality that marriages end for countless reasons—abuse, incompatibility, infidelity, neglect, financial strain, or simply the recognition that two people are no longer right for each other. The Double Standard One of the harshest realities is the unequal treatment of divorced men and women. A divorced man is often encouraged to “move on” and remarry. His divorce is seen as an unfortunate event, not a permanent label. A divorced woman, however, is often expected to carry the burden of her past indefinitely. She may be viewed as “difficult,” “too independent,” or “damaged.” Even when considering remarriage, she may face unfair scrutiny regarding her age, appearance, financial independence, or whether she has children. These double standards reveal deep-rooted gender biases rather than objective truths. The Myth That Divorce Equals Failure Marriage is a relationship, not a measure of personal success. When a marriage ends, it does not erase a woman’s intelligence, compassion, achievements, or dignity. It simply means that one chapter of her life has closed. In many cases, choosing divorce requires immense courage. Walking away from emotional abuse, domestic violence, constant disrespect, or an unhealthy environment is not a sign of weakness—it is an act of self-preservation. Sometimes, staying in a harmful marriage is far more damaging than leaving it. Rebuilding After Divorce Life after divorce is rarely easy. Many women must rebuild their emotional health, financial stability, careers, and confidence while managing family responsibilities and social expectations. Single mothers often shoulder the additional responsibility of raising children while navigating legal and financial challenges. Yet countless divorced women emerge stronger. They pursue education, build successful careers, create stable homes, rediscover their passions, and redefine happiness on their own terms. Their resilience deserves admiration, not judgment. The Responsibility of Society Changing attitudes begins with changing conversations. Instead of asking why a woman got divorced, ask how she is doing. Instead of treating divorce as a permanent stain on her identity, recognise it as one experience in a much larger life story. Families, workplaces, and communities should support divorced women with empathy rather than gossip. Respecting their privacy and their choices is not an act of kindness—it is a matter of basic dignity. Conclusion A divorced woman is not “less than.” She is not broken, impure, or incomplete. She is a person who has lived through difficult circumstances and deserves the same respect, opportunities, and compassion as anyone else. The success of a woman should never be measured by whether her marriage survived. It should be measured by her character, her resilience, her dreams, and the life she chooses to build. Perhaps the greatest change society can make is this: stop asking divorced women to prove their worth and character, they’ve always had it.

Blog

Public Interest Litigation (PIL): A Powerful Tool for Social Justice in India

The Indian judicial system has always played a vital role in protecting the rights of citizens and ensuring justice for all. One of the most significant legal developments in this direction has been the concept of Public Interest Litigation (PIL), which allows individuals and organizations to approach the courts for matters affecting public welfare and social justice. Over the years, PILs have become a strong instrument for addressing issues related to human rights, environmental protection, women’s safety, healthcare, education, and governance. What is a Public Interest Litigation (PIL)? A Public Interest Litigation is a legal action filed in a court of law for the protection of public interest rather than personal benefit. Unlike ordinary cases, a PIL can be filed by any public-spirited individual or organization on behalf of people whose rights may have been violated. The main objective of a PIL is to ensure justice for: Importance of PIL in Modern Society PILs have helped bring attention to several critical issues that may otherwise remain ignored. Through judicial intervention, many important reforms have been initiated across the country. Public Interest Litigation helps in: Areas Where PILs Have Made an Impact In India, PILs have significantly contributed towards: Many landmark judgments in India have emerged through PILs, leading to long-term social and legal reforms. The Role of Legal Professionals in Social Justice Legal professionals play an important role in identifying issues affecting society and bringing them before the courts. Advocates working in the field of public welfare often dedicate their efforts towards ensuring justice for those who may not have access to legal resources. Advocate Sangeeta Pachauri has actively contributed towards public welfare litigation through various Public Interest Litigations concerning: These initiatives reflect the importance of law as a medium for social change and public welfare. Conclusion Public Interest Litigation remains one of the strongest pillars of Indian democracy and constitutional justice. It empowers citizens to raise their voices against injustice and ensures that legal remedies are available even for those who cannot approach the courts themselves. A strong legal system combined with socially responsible legal professionals can bring meaningful change to society and uphold the constitutional values of justice, equality, and dignity for all.

Blog

Understanding the POSH Act: Why Every Workplace Must Ensure a Safe Environment for Women

In today’s professional world, creating a safe and respectful workplace is not just a moral responsibility but also a legal obligation. The Prevention of Sexual Harassment (POSH) Act, 2013 was introduced in India to ensure protection against sexual harassment of women at workplaces and to provide a secure working environment. With increasing awareness regarding workplace rights, organizations are now expected to implement proper policies, awareness programs, and grievance mechanisms under the POSH Act. What is the POSH Act? The POSH Act, formally known as the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, was enacted to protect women from sexual harassment at their place of work. The law applies to: Private companies Government offices Educational institutions NGOs Hospitals Work-from-home and virtual workplaces Every organization with 10 or more employees is legally required to constitute an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC). What Constitutes Sexual Harassment? Sexual harassment may include: Unwelcome physical contact Sexually coloured remarks Inappropriate messages or emails Demand or request for sexual favours Showing pornography Any conduct creating an intimidating or hostile work environment Many incidents often go unreported due to fear, social pressure, or lack of awareness. Hence, legal awareness and proper implementation of the POSH Act become extremely important. Importance of POSH Compliance A safe workplace promotes: Employee confidence Gender equality Professional growth Better productivity Positive organizational culture Failure to comply with POSH regulations can lead to: Legal penalties Damage to reputation Financial liabilities Cancellation of business licenses in severe cases Role of Legal Experts & POSH Trainers Proper implementation of the POSH Act requires guidance from trained legal professionals and certified POSH trainers. Organizations should regularly conduct: POSH awareness workshops Employee sensitization sessions ICC training programs Legal compliance audits Advocate Sangeeta Pachauri, a trained mediator and POSH Act trainer, has actively worked towards spreading awareness regarding workplace safety and women’s rights while also contributing through legal initiatives and public interest litigations concerning POSH implementation. Conclusion A workplace built on dignity, respect, and equality creates stronger organizations and a healthier society. The POSH Act is not merely a compliance requirement — it is a step towards ensuring justice, safety, and empowerment for women at every workplace. Organizations must actively adopt preventive measures, encourage awareness, and ensure proper redressal mechanisms to create an environment where every individual can work with confidence and security. Share the Post: Related Posts

Scroll to Top