'Married woman living in with another man for 15 years can claim maintenance'

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court recently held that a married woman who had been in a “live-in” relationship with another man for over 15 years is entitled to maintenance from him under the special anti-domestic violence law.



Justice Bharati Dangre struck down a sessions court order that had rejected the woman’s plea for maintenance.

The woman had claimed that she had lived with the man for a decade and half, shared household expenses with him and even her children from her previous marriage used to call him “father”.

Justice Dangre held that there existed a domestic relationship in the nature of a marriage between the couple.

“From the facts of this case, it can be seen that the couple has held themselves to the world as husband and wife. Not only that, there was an economic exchange between them and they were carrying out the said business of trading (in vegetables). It is her categorical statement that he had, in fact, helped her raise the children and share household expenses,” said the judge. The court pointed to the woman’s statement that she had shared money received for her daughter’s wedding expenses with the man and now she was left with no funds to look after herself.

The judge said it would have to consider the fact that the Domestic Violence (DV) Act enacted in 2005 was a benovelent law for protecting women from violence.

“The term ‘abuse’ for which the protection can be sought has been construed to be operating on a wide compass to include physical and economic abuse. Taking into consideration the purpose of the enactment, the provisions contained in the enactment are to be liberally construed to achieve the object of ensuring the welfare of a woman for whom the Act is intended to grant certain protection in certain situations,” said Justice Dangre.

In her application, the woman said that she had married a man around 20 years ago who left her. She had two sons and a daughter from the marriage. In 1994, she met a vegetable trader and started living with him along with her children. After 15 years of the relationship, she left him following a dispute and in 2012 lodged a complaint under the DV Act seeking maintenance. The magistrate's court held that she was entitled to maintenance but the sessions court overturned the order. She filed an appeal in high court.

The woman’s lawyers said that she had lived in a “shared household” with the man for 15 years.

The man’s lawyers opposed the plea saying “merely living together under a shared household is not the only test of determining whether the relationship between the couple was in the nature of marriage”.

The court rejected the man’s contention and relied on witnesses who had stated that the couple had lived together for a long time and the woman was known as the man’s wife.