## Landmark Case Challenges Application โofโ Marital Laws to Same-Sex Relationships in India
The Delhi High Court is currently hearing a meaningful case that โคtests the limits of India’s existing marital laws, centered around petitions filed by โขan individual โขbiologically femaleโ who is undergoingโ treatmentโ for gender dysphoria. The litigantโ is seeking to have first Information Reportsโค (FIRs) filed by her former female partner quashed.
One petition requests the dismissal ofโข an FIR registered in Delhi alleging cruelty by a husband or his relatives towards a woman, a charge under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The second petition asks the High โฃCourt to halt proceedings in a local court initiated under โprovisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence act, 2005, arguing the relationship was a same-sex โคpartnership.Both โขmatters are being considered by the same judge.
The petitionerโฃ identifies as having been born with female geneticโ characteristicsโ but was โคlater diagnosed with gender dysphoria.She consistently exhibited behavioral and social traits aligning with a male identity. Supporting this,she has submitted a certificate from the All india Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) confirming her genetic โขsex,her desire to transition toโข male,and her ongoing therapeuticโ treatment.
The couple initially connected on social media โin 2022 while the petitioner was studying medicine abroad, bonding over her experiences with gender dysphoria. Following her โreturn to India in October โข2023, they participated in a “symbolic marriage” or civil union in Panchkula, Haryana, documented by โaโข certificate issued by the Vaidik Pujan Kendra. They subsequently shared a rented โflat in Delhi, where their relationship ultimately deteriorated.The situation escalated in Octoberโ 2024 when the petitioner โขfiled a petition for nullity with a Delhi family court, asserting the union was invalid due to the current lack of legal recognition for marriage โฃbetween โขtwo โwomen. this led to the complaints โขfiledโข by โคthe respondent,which are now the subject โขof the petitions before the Delhi High Court.The case raises complex โlegal questions. According to constitutional law expert Virag Gupta, “same-sex marriage is not yet recognised in law; noโฃ statuteโ protects or endorses a marital โunion between same-sex couples.” Heโฃ notes that while courts have allowed Section 498Aโ or related proceedings in live-in relationships, these cases โคhave always involvedโค a man and a woman, and crucially, require a valid and lawful marriage for relief under โSection 498A.
Advocate Tushar Sannu โemphasizes that the legislative intent behind Section 498A is rooted in traditional marital structures, citingโฃ the Reema Aggarwal v. Anupam case, which โขreinforced the provision’s โpurpose of protecting โwomen within marriage.The Supremeโ Court’s ruling inโ Supriyo v. Union of India (2023) further solidified โขthis framework.
“Given the absenceโ of formal legal recognition for same-sex spousal status, the specific safeguards underโฃ Section 498A are not available to these unions,” Sannu stated.
Advocate anand Prakash points out the literal interpretation of Sectionโข 498A, which penalizes cruelty โขby a “husband” or his “relatives” against a “wife,” โrenders it inapplicable in a relationship between two women, as neither party fulfills the legal definitions.
This case underscores the existing gaps in India’s legal framework concerning same-sex relationships. The High Court’s decision will likely clarify whetherโ prosecution under Section 498A can proceed withoutโ a legally recognized marriage, and whether the Domestic Violence Act can be applied to same-sexโค couples, possiblyโฃ setting a precedent withโฃ significant implications for LGBTQ+ โฃrights in India.
Published – november 02, 2025 08:24 pm IST.