“Impact Of BNSS 2023 On Women's Rights In Live-in-relationships”

Abstract

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, enacted as part of India’s criminal law reforms replacing the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), has triggered wide-ranging debates on its implications for women’s rights, gender justice, and evolving social institutions such as live-in relationships. While the BNSS introduces modernized procedures, technological integration, and stronger victim-centric provisions, its silence on certain aspects relating to women’s safety, autonomy, and the recognition of non-marital partnerships leaves critical questions unanswered. This article undertakes a comprehensive analysis of the impact of BNSS 2023 on women’s rights, with special focus on live-in relationships, which have gained legal recognition through judicial precedents but remain socially contested. Through doctrinal analysis, case law study, and comparative perspectives, this article explores how BNSS 2023 strengthens, limits, or ignores key dimensions of women’s rights, and assesses whether it adequately addresses the emerging complexities of live-in relationships in modern India. The study concludes with recommendations for legal and policy reforms aimed at ensuring that women in both marital and non-marital relationships are equally protected under the evolving criminal justice framework.

Introduction

India’s criminal justice system has been undergoing major reforms with the introduction of three new legislations in 2023 — the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA). The BNSS 2023, in particular, replaces the century-old Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, which itself was a colonial-era successor to the Criminal Procedure Code of 1898. The stated objectives of BNSS are modernization, simplification, speedier trials, victim protection, and enhanced use of technology.

Among the many stakeholders impacted by these changes, women occupy a central place. Women’s rights in India, especially relating to safety, dignity, equality, and autonomy, have been historically shaped by patriarchal laws, social norms, and judicial interventions. Over the years, reforms like Section 498A of IPC (now BNS), the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA), and laws relating to sexual harassment and trafficking have sought to address gender injustice. However, procedural law is equally important — it governs how rights are enforced, how crimes are investigated, how evidence is presented, and how victims are protected during trials.

The rise of live-in relationships adds another dimension to this discussion. Indian courts, particularly the Supreme Court and High Courts, have gradually recognized live-in relationships as legitimate under certain conditions, extending protections under the PWDVA and Article 21 of the Constitution. Yet, societal stigma and legislative silence continue to pose challenges for women in such relationships, who often face vulnerability in cases of abandonment, abuse, or denial of rights.

This article examines whether BNSS 2023 adequately protects women’s rights in general, and women in live-in relationships in particular. It analyses the provisions relating to arrest, investigation, victim participation, trial procedures, and technological reforms, to determine whether the BNSS strengthens or weakens women’s access to justice. It also highlights the gaps in BNSS regarding live-in relationships and evaluates how far judicial precedents can fill this void.

Historical Background: Women’s Rights & Evolution from CrPC to BNSS

Colonial Legacy & CrPC, 1973

The Indian criminal procedure system has long been criticized for being outdated, slow, and biased against vulnerable groups. The CrPC, 1973, though an improvement over the 1898 Code, was still largely colonial in its orientation. Women’s issues were not central to its framework, though some provisions gradually emerged:

Section 46(4): Prohibited arrest of women after sunset and before sunrise without special permission.

Section 160: Protected women from being called to police stations for questioning; statements had to be recorded at their residence.

Section 173: Mandated speedy investigation in rape cases.

However, procedural delays, insensitive handling of victims, and secondary victimization during trials remained common.

BNSS 2023: Key Provisions Relevant to Women

1. Arrest & Custody (Sections 35–38 BNSS)

• Restrictions on arrest aim to prevent arbitrary detention.

• For women, existing safeguards (no arrest at night, presence of female officer) are retained.

• Mandatory videography of searches and arrests enhances transparency.

2. Victim-Centric Provisions (Section 193 & 230 BNSS)

• Victims now have the right to be heard at every stage of trial, including bail.

• Free copies of judgments and FIRs are to be provided to victims.

• Special emphasis on protecting dignity and privacy in sexual offences.

3. Technology Integration (Sections 532–533 BNSS)

• Electronic filing of complaints, digital summons, and virtual hearings can help women overcome logistical barriers.

• Statements of rape victims may be recorded through electronic means in safe environments.

4. Speedier Investigation & Trial (Sections 193–230 BNSS)

• Mandatory completion of investigation in sexual

offences within 2 months.

• Time limits for framing of charges and disposal of cases, reducing pendency that disproportionately harms women victims.

5. Protective Measures

• In-camera trials for sexual offences continue.

• Emphasis on forensic evidence reduces reliance on victim’s sole testimony, lessening trauma during cross-examination.

Women’s Rights & BNSS: A Detailed Analysis

While BNSS introduces important safeguards, a closer analysis reveals both strengths and gaps.

Strengths

1. Recognition of Victim’s Rights – Women survivors of sexual and domestic crimes gain stronger procedural rights.

2. Technological Reforms – Online FIRs, video statements, and digital summons benefit women unable to travel to courts.

3. Forensic Mandates – Help in ensuring convictions in crimes like rape and dowry death.

Gaps

1. Silence on Gender-Specific Concerns Beyond Sexual Offences – BNSS primarily focuses on sexual crimes; broader issues like workplace harassment or live-in abuse remain unaddressed.

2. Implementation Burden – Many reforms depend on infrastructure (digital, forensic labs, trained officers), which remains inadequate in rural India.

3. No Specific Provisions for Live-in Relationships – Despite judicial recognition, BNSS does not directly address crimes like abandonment, coercion, or denial of maintenance in live-in setups.

Live-in Relationships under Indian Law: Judicial Evolution

Constitutional Basis

Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, which courts have interpreted to include the right to choose one’s partner and cohabit outside marriage.

Landmark Judgments

• Lata Singh v. State of U.P. (2006) – Supreme Court recognized live-in relationships between consenting adults as not illegal.

• D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal (2010) – Defined conditions for a relationship “in the nature of marriage” to claim protection under PWDVA.

• Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma (2013) – Expanded PWDVA protections but excluded casual relationships.

• Nandakumar v. State of Kerala (2018) – Held that adults have the right to live together, even if not of marriageable age for formal marriage.

Current Legal Position

• Live-in relationships are not illegal.

• Women in such relationships can claim protection from domestic violence under PWDVA.

• Children from live-in relationships are considered legitimate for inheritance purposes.

BNSS & Live-in Relationships: Implications

Positive Implications

• Women in live-in relationships benefit from broader victim-centric reforms (e.g., right to participate in proceedings, speedy investigation).

• Recording of statements via electronic means ensures privacy in sensitive cases involving non-marital partnerships.

Negative / Missing Aspects

• BNSS does not explicitly acknowledge live-in relationships.

• Women abandoned or exploited in live-in setups still rely on PWDVA + judicial interpretation, not procedural safeguards.

• No clear guidelines for police investigation in cases of complaints arising out of live-in disputes.

Challenges & Criticisms

1. Lack of Specificity – Women in live-in relationships are invisible in BNSS, leading to inconsistent application.

2. Societal Stigma – Even if law recognizes rights, police and trial courts often reflect social biases against live-in couples.

3. Implementation Gaps – Digital reforms may not reach rural women, leaving them excluded.

4. Potential Misuse Allegations – Like Section 498A IPC, similar concerns may arise if live-in disputes are brought within procedural protections.

Comparative Perspective

1. USA & Europe – Many jurisdictions recognize “domestic partnerships” with rights similar to marriage.

2. South Africa – Courts extend constitutional protection to cohabiting couples.

3. India – Judicial recognition exists, but no legislative codification; BNSS missed an opportunity to provide clarity.

Future Outlook

1. Codification Needed – Explicit recognition of live-in partners under BNSS could prevent interpretative gaps.

2. Training of Police & Judiciary – Sensitization towards women in non-marital relationships is crucial.

3. Integration with PWDVA – Harmonization of BNSS with existing protective laws would strengthen women’s rights.

4. Public Awareness – Legal literacy campaigns needed to inform women in live-in relationships about available remedies.

Conclusion

The BNSS 2023 represents a significant milestone in India’s criminal justice reforms, modernizing procedures and enhancing victim rights. For women, its provisions on speedy investigation, victim participation, and use of technology mark genuine progress. However, the law falls short of addressing the complex realities of live-in relationships, which remain governed primarily by judicial precedents and the PWDVA. In an era where individual autonomy and alternative family structures are gaining recognition, legislative silence creates uncertainty and vulnerability for women outside traditional marriage.

Ultimately, while BNSS 2023 strengthens certain procedural safeguards, it does not fully integrate women’s rights into its framework, nor does it acknowledge the lived realities of women in live-in relationships. A holistic approach, combining legislative reforms, judicial sensitivity, and social change, is necessary to ensure that the promise of gender justice under the BNSS is fully realized. Only then can India claim to have a criminal justice system that truly protects all women, irrespective of marital status or social conformity.

Here are some questions and answers on the topic:

Q1. What are the key provisions of BNSS 2023 that directly affect women’s rights?

Answer: The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has introduced several changes that have a deep impact on women’s rights and access to justice. One of the most important reforms is the emphasis on the participation of victims at every stage of criminal proceedings, including during bail hearings, which ensures that women survivors of crime are not sidelined in the process. The law also strengthens the protection of dignity and privacy by mandating in-camera trials for sexual offences and allowing statements of victims to be recorded electronically in safer environments, thus reducing the trauma of repeated public appearances in court. The BNSS sets strict timelines for the completion of investigations in sexual offences, especially rape cases, by requiring the police to finish their investigation within two months, which helps in delivering justice without unnecessary delays. The safeguards relating to arrest are particularly significant for women, as the law prohibits the arrest of women during nighttime hours except under exceptional circumstances and always in the presence of a female police officer. The wider use of technology, such as online filing of complaints, electronic service of summons, and video recording of evidence, also helps women who face geographical, social, or financial barriers in approaching the justice system. Together, these provisions make the process more victim-friendly, enhance accountability, and offer women greater procedural protection than was available under the earlier CrPC.

Q2. How does BNSS 2023 impact women in live-in relationships?

Answer: BNSS 2023 does not directly deal with the subject of live-in relationships, and this silence is significant given the growing number of such partnerships in India. Women in live-in relationships often face unique challenges such as abandonment, abuse, or denial of maintenance, but the procedural law does not specifically mention their rights. Despite this gap, certain provisions of the BNSS indirectly benefit women in live-in arrangements. For instance, if a woman in such a relationship faces violence or sexual assault, she can still rely on the protections of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and the victim-centric reforms of the BNSS, such as speedy investigation, electronic recording of evidence, and the right to be heard during trial. These procedural safeguards help in making the justice process less burdensome for women outside the institution of marriage. However, since the law does not acknowledge live-in partners as a separate category, the burden still falls on the judiciary to extend these protections through interpretation, and women in live-in relationships remain vulnerable due to lack of legislative clarity.

Q3. What challenges and criticisms emerge in relation to BNSS 2023 and women’s rights?

Answer: Although BNSS 2023 has been praised for being more victim-friendly and modern, there are significant criticisms when it comes to women’s rights. A major challenge is that the law continues to treat women primarily as victims of sexual offences, while ignoring other dimensions of gender justice such as economic abuse, workplace harassment, or exploitation in live-in relationships. The silence of the BNSS on live-in partnerships reflects a lack of legislative courage in acknowledging social realities, forcing women in such relationships to rely solely on judicial interpretations. Another criticism is that the ambitious provisions for speedy investigation, forensic evidence, and technological integration are difficult to implement due to poor infrastructure, especially in rural and semi-urban areas, where most women face the highest barriers to justice. Social stigma also continues to play a role in how police and courts handle cases, particularly those involving non-marital relationships, which means that even the best-written procedures may fail in practice. Critics therefore argue that while BNSS modernizes the system, it does not go far enough to address the structural and cultural barriers that women encounter in seeking justice.

Q4. What is the future outlook for women’s rights and live-in relationships under the BNSS framework?

Answer: The future of women’s rights under the BNSS framework depends heavily on how the law is implemented and how courts continue to interpret its provisions in light of constitutional guarantees. While the BNSS provides stronger victim participation, time-bound investigations, and increased reliance on technology, these reforms will only succeed if police officers, prosecutors, and judges are trained and sensitized towards gender justice. For women in live-in relationships, the path forward remains uncertain because the legislature has chosen not to directly recognize such partnerships. The judiciary has already taken steps by protecting women in “relationships in the nature of marriage” under the Domestic Violence Act, but without codified recognition in BNSS, inconsistencies will persist in enforcement. The future outlook therefore calls for harmonization between substantive laws like the PWDVA and procedural frameworks like BNSS, as well as public awareness campaigns to inform women of their rights. If these reforms are combined with better infrastructure, digital access, and societal acceptance of non-traditional family structures, women in both marriages and live-in relationships may finally achieve greater security and equality under the criminal justice system. 

Disclaimer: The content shared in this blog is intended solely for general informational and educational purposes. It provides only a basic understanding of the subject and should not be considered as professional legal advice. For specific guidance or in-depth legal assistance, readers are strongly advised to consult a qualified legal professional.