Skip to main content

Woman can invoke Domestic Violence Act against husband’s mother, sister

In a landmark order, the Bombay High Court has ruled a woman can invoke criminal provisions of the Domestic Violence Act against female relatives of her husband. Hearing a plea filed by Mumbai resident Sachin Patil and his family, challenging the case filed by his estranged wife, especially against his mother and sister, Justice Ravindra Ghuge said the special law to tackle domestic violence can't be restricted only to the husband's male relatives.

"Since the 2005 Act is aimed at protecting women, the submissions of Patil, if accepted, would create an insulation for the female members of the husband's family who may go unpunished for acts amounting to domestic violence," said Justice Ghuge, adding, "When specific allegations are made against the lady members of the husband's family like the mother-in-law, or the sister of the husband etc, the complainant can't be rendered remedy-less by precluding her from arraigning such female members who could be tried for offences of assault or any type of the offence (as per the law)."

The HC also underlined the importance of the provisions of the law for protecting woman from violence that occurs within families and which is not spoken about. "(The law) has been introduced to protect women against domestic violence which is undoubtedly a human rights issue and is a serious deterrence to development. The phenomenon of domestic violence appears to be widely prevalent, but as such remains invisible in the public domain. It can't be ignored that in several cases, women, who have been subjected to cruelty by the husband and/or his relatives, have chosen to digest such acts for the fear of ruining their marriage and suffering exposure to the public," said the judge, while dismissing Patil's petition.

Under the DV Act, a woman can file a complaint against any adult male, who she is in a domestic relationship with. It further says that when the complainant is a wife, then she can file against the relative of the husband or the male partner. Patil's lawyers relied on an HC order which appeared to say only male relatives could be charged. However, in Patil's case, the HC relied on a Supreme Court judgement which said female relatives can also be booked under the law.

Patil's wife Seema had approached the magistrate's court in 2014 under the DV Act against her husband and his relatives, alleging various instances of violence. The magistrate's court initiated proceedings, which was challenged by Patil in the HC.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

MACT - Permanent disability - calculate - compensation - Supreme Court - Part 2

1) C. K. Subramonia Iyer vs. T. Kunhikuttan Nair - AIR 1970 SC 376 2) R. D. Hattangadi vs. Pest Control (India) Ltd. - 1995 (1) SCC 551 3) Baker vs. Willoughby - 1970 AC 467 4) Arvind Kumar Mishra v. New India Assurance Co.Ltd. - 2010(10) SCALE 298 5) Yadava Kumar v. D.M., National Insurance Co. Ltd. - 2010 (8) SCALE 567) 5. The heads under which compensation is awarded in personal injury cases are the following : Pecuniary damages (Special Damages) (i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing food, and miscellaneous expenditure. (ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising : (a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment; (b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability. (iii) Future medical expenses. Non-pecuniary damages (General Damages) (iv) Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries. (v) Loss of ...

Full & Final payment - No dues certificate - end of contract

Whether after the contract comes to an end by completion of the contract work and acceptance of the final bill in full and final satisfaction and after issuance a `No Due Certificate' by the contractor Supreme Court of India Supreme Court of India R.L. Kalathia & Co. vs State Of Gujarat on 14 January, 2011 Author: P Sathasivam Bench: P. Sathasivam, B.S. Chauhan IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3245 OF 2003 R.L. Kalathia & Co Appellant(s) Versus State of Gujarat .... Respondent(s) JUDGMENT P. Sathasivam, J. 1) This appeal is directed against the judgment and final order dated 07.10.2002 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat whereby the High Court set aside the judgment and decree dated 14.12.1982 passed by the Civil Judge, (S.D.), Jamnagar directing the State Government to pay a sum of Rs.2,27,758/- with costs and interest and dismissed the Civil Suit as well as cross objections filed by the a...

Private Colleges Cannot Withhold Student’s Certificates For Payment Of Amount

In a significant judgement, the , has held that private self financing Colleges cannot withhold certificates of students, for payment of amount. The practise of withholding the certificates, and non-issuance of transfer certificate to students, to coerce them into meeting unconscionable demands like paying entire course fee for leaving the course midway, or to force them to serve the institution after completion of course, etc is very rampant. In clear unambiguous terms, the Court has held that such practise is illegal and opposed to public policy. Often faced with the supreme bargaining position of the Colleges, the students often execute bonds authorising colleges to do so. But, such bonds have no validity in the eyes of law. It was held that :- “The agreements obtained by the College from petitioners authorising them to withhold the certificates of the petitioners cannot be accepted as an approved social conduct and the same, in that sense, is unethical. Further, agreements of tha...