The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that women in live-in relationships can seek protection under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) or Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), a TOI report stated. Both provisions punish a husband or his relatives with up to three years in jail for subjecting a woman to cruelty. A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N K Singh said the protection will apply only to live-in relationships that are "in the nature of marriage."The court rejected the argument that Section 498A applies only to women married in the traditional sense. It said the law was framed to address a social problem and must be read with that goal in mind. At the same time, the bench noted rising cases of misuse of the section and said a woman seeking its protection will first have to prove that her relationship was in the nature of marriage.Protection Limited to Marriage-Like RelationshipsThe bench made clear that not every live-in arrangement will fall under Section 498A. Only those relationships that resemble marriage in nature qualify for protection under the law."Cruelty does not check at the door whether the house it's entering is that of a married woman or not. Once it enters, its propensity to destroy is aggravated," the court said.Why The Court Extended The LawThe bench said limiting protection to married women alone would go against the purpose of the law."Since the provision was aimed at solving a societal issue, it is this larger objective of securing equality for women, stepping away from the superiority of males that is an inheritance from bygone days, that has to inform the understanding in interpretation and implementation of the Section," the court said.Justice Karol, who wrote the judgment, added: "When the objective of the Section 498A was to provide coverage to those cases where harassment by husband or in-laws through wilful conduct causing mental or physical injury or driving the woman to suicide, then to say that such harassment can only be caused when they are married and not before that, in our considered view, would be a case of over simplification. Whether or not the woman in question is married or not, in the present day, does not have a proximate link to the objective of the section, which is to prevent cruelty in such a household setting."Court Flags Misuse Of Section 498AThe bench also took note of growing complaints that Section 498A is being misused to settle personal scores. It said the ruling will apply only to relationships "in the nature of marriage" and placed the initial burden of proof on the woman seeking protection under the law.Law Must Adapt To Changing SocietyThe bench said the law needs to keep pace with social change, pointing to shifts in how live-in relationships and same-sex relationships are viewed today."Marriage was considered to be sacrosanct, which undoubtedly is a changing phenomenon. Living together, prior to marriage, is not unheard of or unacceptable anymore. In the same way, that same-sex relations, once criminalised and deemed to be a mental illness, have now been decriminalised and recognised as naturally occurring. This is the evolution of societal standards," the court said.It added that no one enters a relationship expecting cruelty. "Not a single person goes into a relationship knowing or anticipating that cruelty may be meted out to them. When a couple sets out on their journey, it is always, one presumes, with the best of intentions and to bring joyfulness of all forms. With the passage of time, however, some relationships may go down this troublesome path. The law must provide for the same. This distinction between "married" and "live-in relationship in the nature of marriage", in as much as it relates to the protection envisaged by Section 498A, has no rational nexus with the object of preventing domestic violence and is as such offensive to Article 14 of the Constitution," the bench said.