The reactions were flippant and uncalled for: Flavia agnes

Interview with Lawyer, activist

The Madras High Court ruling, which indicated (in its assessment of a particular dispute) that premarital sex was akin to marriage, created quite a furore last week, especially on the social media. Flavia agnes, lawyer, activist and the founder of women's legal aid group Majlis, talks to Ranjita Ganesan about the ruling and its implications.

What do you think about the ruling?
The ruling is positive without a doubt. The couple in question had been living together for years and had children. According to the law, the woman has a right to ask for maintenance.

Why was it misinterpreted and met with anger on the social media?

The only problem was perhaps the language which was a bit vulgar. The judge used some phrases like 'consummating sexual cravings.'

Was the furore justified?
The reactions were flippant and uncalled for. I don't understand the furore because there is no ban on casual sex. Adults are free to make that decision. Law comes into the picture only when a woman gets pregnant and is abandoned or beaten up. Even in a casual relationship, people should exercise caution and take responsibility.

Does the ruling give validation to live-in relationships?
This ruling is not a landmark one. Live-in relationships are not illegal anyway. If two adults decide to live together, the law can't stop them.

What are the problems faced in live-in relationships when a partner walks out?
There are many instances of abandonment. A man may promise to marry the woman in the future or say he will leave his spouse soon. After having children or letting the woman go through a series of abortions, he will turn around saying they are not married and walk out. The woman is then left to fend for herself and the children.

What would documentary evidence include?
Various documents can be used as evidence. It could be ration cards of the man and woman with the same address, proving that they had been living together, as well as joint bank account statements or documents showing that a man introduced his partner to a bank. Even an affidavit from the neighbour stating that the couple had been living there is accepted as evidence.

Is it easy to produce such papers in non-marital relationships?
A lot of women are not aware of what can be used as evidence. They don't expect that they will be abandoned and have to show evidence to get maintenance. Once they decide to go to court, we help them gather the relevant documents. However, in some cases, neighbours take the man's side and refuse to help.

Any cases you have seen recently where such rulings might help?
There is a perception that such rulings will apply to or help only those women who live in slums or rural areas. You would be surprised to know how many educated, liberated women - lawyers, medical professionals, corporate employees - seek advice on such matters. They get treated like doormats and come for help when they realise they are being taken advantage of. Some are even willing to pay Rs 20,000 for legal consultation.

Do we need a separate set of laws for live-in relationships?
The Domestic Violence Act can be applied to handle disputes even in live-in relationships. Women are usually not aware of their rights. They have the entitlements of a wife including maintenance and injunction, which protects them from being thrown out of the house.

Is the Domestic Violence Act adequate or are there loopholes?
There was a case recently where the judge said a man need not pay for the maintenance of his 36-year-old differently-abled son because he is not a child in the eyes of the law. The mother is expected to care for the son on a sum of Rs 5,000. It is sad but such loopholes remain.