Transgender Woman Can File Cruelty Complaint Under Section 498A IPC, Rules Andhra Pradesh High Court

The ruling came in the case of Viswanathan Krishna Murthy vs The State of Andhra Pradesh and Another, where the petitioner sought the quashing of charges under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The complaint had been filed by a transgender woman, assigned male at birth but identifying and living as a woman, against her husband and in-laws.

Transgender Women In Marriages Are Protected by Anti-Cruelty Laws

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that a transgender woman in heterosexual marriage can file a complaint against her husband and in-laws under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa emphasised that a transgender woman, identifying as a female and living in a marital relationship with a man, cannot be excluded from the protection of laws meant to safeguard women from dowry-related harassment and cruelty.

“This Court makes it clear that, a transwoman, who is a transgender, being in heterosexual marriage, shall have protection under Section 498-A IPC,” the single-judge ruled as per Live Law. The petitioners had argued that a trans woman cannot complain to Section 498A of IPC against her husband or in-laws as she cannot be considered as a woman in a complete sense.

However, the Court held that the argument that a trans woman cannot be regarded as a ‘woman’ merely because she is incapable of biological reproduction is deeply flawed and legally impermissible. “Such a narrow view of womanhood with reproduction undermines the very spirit of the Constitution, which upholds dignity, identity, and equality for all individuals irrespective of gender identity,” the Court observed.

“To deny a trans woman the status of a 'woman' for the purpose of legal protection under Section 498-A IPC solely on the ground of her reproductive capacity is to perpetuate discrimination and to violate Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution. Such a contention, therefore, deserves to be rejected at the outset,” it added.

Don't Miss:Pride Month 2025: Exploring The Evolution Of LGBTQ+ Representation In Indian Cinema

More Details About The Case

The Court referred to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Supriyo vs Union of India, in which the top court ruled against recognising same-sex marriages.

“It is pertinent to note that despite denying legal validity to same-sex marriage, the Court unanimously directed the Union government to form a high-level committee under the Cabinet Secretary to examine and recommend measures ensuring equal rights for queer couples in areas such as adoption, healthcare, succession, pensions, and financial services. The Hon'ble Court's clarification that transgender individuals in heterosexual relationships have the right to marry under the existing legal framework strikes at the very argument raised by the learned counsel for the Petitioners in the case on hand, who placed reliance on the said decision,” the High Court said, as per Live Law.

Considering the matter on merits, the Court noted that the accused-husband knew that the complainant was a trans woman. It added that he loved her, lived with her for some time, and then married her at an Arya Samaj Mandir. It further found no allegation in the complaint to show that the accused had subjected her to cruelty.

Don't Miss:Trans Women Not Legally Women, Declares Uk Supreme Court: Find The Full Verdict Inside

“The criminal proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 in C.C.No.585 of 2022 on the file of the Court of II Additional Munsif Magistrate, Ongole for the offences under Section 498-A read with 34 IPC and Section 4 of the D.P. Act, are hereby quashed,” it ordered.

Keep reading Herzindagi for more such stories.

Credits: Freepik