Gender-based violence against women is an important public health problem, which claims

millions of victims worldwide. It is a notable human rights violation and is deeply rooted in
gender inequality.

Domestic violence is a violence of human right within the family.

STATISTICS

A longitudinal research study by BMC Women‘s Health analysing trends and lessons on
domestic violence faced by Indian women from 2001 to 2018 has highlighted that India needs to
focus on efforts to reduce the gaps in the administrative data which includes underreporting and
almost stagnant data over the time.

Between 2001 and 2018, the majority of the domestic violence cases were filed under ‗cruelty
by husband or his relatives‘, with the reported rate of this crime increasing by 53% over 18 years.
The study has also highlighted that the rate of cases of cruelty by husbands or relatives was 28.3
per 1,00,000 women in 2018, which is an increase of 53% from 2001. The rate of reported dowry
deaths and abetment to suicide was 2% and 1.4%, respectively, in 2018. The data analysed by the
researchers was extracted from the annual reports of the National Crimes Record Bureau
(NCRB) under four domestic violence crime headings – cruelty by husband or his relatives,
dowry deaths, abetment to suicide, and protection of women against domestic violence act. A
total of 1,548,548 cases were reported under cruelty by husband or his relatives in India from
2001 to 2018.

According to the World Health Organization, one out of every three women in the world is
subjected to gender-based violence, the majority of which is perpetrated by intimate partners.
But only 1 in 10 of these women formally reports the offence. Same is the case with india.
Nearly one in three women in India is likely to have been subjected to physical, emotional, or
sexual abuse at the hands of their husbands. Physical violence was the most common form of
abuse, with nearly 27.5% of women reporting this. Sexual abuse and emotional abuse were
reported by nearly 13% and nearly 7%, respectively.

Around 3.5% of respondents said they had been subjected to all three types of abuse, and nearly
7% had been injured as a result of their spouse‘s abusive behaviour. These figures suggest that
India is unlikely to meet Sustainable Development Goal (SDG-5) 5, which focuses on gender
equality and the elimination of all forms of violence against women and girls by 2030, say the
researchers.

It is really shocking to note that 40 % Women and 38% Men in India Find Domestic Violence
Acceptable in Some Cases.

According to the latest report by The National Family Health Survey (NFHS) a large scale,
and multi round survey conducted in Indian households:“29.3% married Indian women between
the ages of 18-49 years have faced domestic violence/or sexual violence. 3.1% of pregnant
women between the ages of 18-49 have experienced physical violence during any pregnancy.”
And that‘s just the number of cases reported by women; there are always a large number of cases
that never make it to the police.

INTERNATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK

Even if the International Bill of Human Rights which consists of The Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948, and its implementing
covenants, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) do not explicitly
address domestic violence, they along with the Optional Protocol to the ICCPR articulate a
state‘s duty to protect fundamental human rights that are commonly violated in domestic
violence cases. Those rights include the right to life, the right to physical and mental integrity,
the right to equal protection of the laws and the right to be free from discrimination. The
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, entered into
force in 1981, also does not explicitly include language on violence against women or domestic
violence but guarantees the human rights. In 1992, the Committee on the Elimination of All
Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which is the United Nations committee
charged with monitoring the Convention, adopted General Recommendation Number 19. This
recommendation addresses the Women‘s Convention‘s silence on violence and states that
gender-based violence is a ―form of discrimination which seriously inhibits women‘s ability to
enjoy rights and freedoms on a basis of equality with men.‖ This recommendation was the first
time a human rights treaty or convention was officially interpreted to prohibit violence against
women. The recommendation made clear that domestic violence was included.

United Nations conference documents address the issue of domestic violence. They are widely
recognized as consensus documents that is, documents that reflect an international consensus on
the state of international law. The Report of the World Conference of the United Nations Decade
for Women: Equality, Development and Peace, was the first time domestic violence was
explicitly mentioned in an official document of the United Nations.

At the 1985 Third World Conference on Women in Nairobi, Kenya, domestic violence received
significant attention. The final conference report called on governments to ―undertake effective
measures, including mobilizing community resources to identify, prevent and eliminate all
violence, including family violence, against women and to provide shelter, support and
reorientation services for abused women and children.‖ Violence against women, including
domestic violence, was a major focus at the 1995 Fourth World Conference on Women in
Beijing, China.

Five years later, at the United Nations‘ conference, Beijing plus 5: A Special Session on Women
2000: Gender Equality, Development and Peace for the Twenty-First Century, the final
document detailed obstacles for women and included domestic violence.

The Programme of Action from the 1994 International Conference on Population and
Development (ICPD) in Cairo, Egypt, articulates the need for government attention to all forms
of violence against women.
In 1993, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Elimination of
Violence Against Women (DEVAW). This landmark document was a result of efforts within the
United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) and the Economic and Social
Council (ECOSOC). While DEVAW does not have the binding legal authority of a convention
or treaty, as a United Nations General Assembly declaration, it is universal in coverage and a
strong statement of principle to the international community. DEVAW provides that states
should investigate and punish acts of domestic violence, develop comprehensive legal, political,
administrative and cultural programs to prevent violence against women, provide training to law
enforcement officials and promote research and collect statistics relating to the prevalence of
domestic violence.

NEED FOR THE ACT

This is the most prevalent form of domestic violence. The orthodox and conservative thinking of
society is one reason behind considering women physically and emotionally weaker than men.
Although women today prove to be no less than men, the reports of violence against them have
been far more numerous than against people in almost every field of life. New Delhi‘s tandoor
murder case in 1995 portrayed a horrific event of a woman being murdered and burnt by her
husband to the tandoor. This was a result of the man suspecting his wife Naina Sahni of having
an extramarital affair that resulted in marital disagreement and domestic violence. The main
causes of battering women by their husbands includes, argue with the partner, refuse to have sex
with him, neglect children, leave the house without telling the partner, not cook properly or on
time, go about marriage, not take care of the baby‘s laws etc. In certain cases, female infertility
often leads to family members being targeted.

Avidness for the dowry, a male child‘s desire and the spouse‘s alcoholism are important factors
in rural domestic violence. There have been horrific reports that young brides have been burnt
alive or continually harassed for not returning the amount of requested dowry to their homes.

Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act (DVA) was passed on 13 September 2005.
It‘s a civil law which aims to ensure that a female victim of violence at home has a four-fold
support system. Women were only permitted to seek recourse to the Indian Penal Code before
Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act, namely Section 304B (dowry death) and
Section 498A.

OBJECTIVES OF THE ACT

1. To enforce harsh punishment and must hold the culprits accountable for committing such
heinous acts of violence.

2. To lay down the law and govern it in accordance with the international standards for the
prevention of domestic violence.

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE – Defined under section 3

FORMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

Physical violence

Means any act or conduct which is of such a nature as to cause bodily pain, harm, or danger to
life, limb or health or impair the health or development of the aggrieved person and includes
assault, criminal intimidation and criminal force;

● Beating
● Slapping
● Hitting
● Biting
● Kicking
● Punching
● Pushing
● Shoving
● Or causing bodily injury or pain in any other manner

Psychological or emotional abuse:

Includes insults, ridicule, humiliation, name calling and insults or ridicule specially with regard
to not having a child or a male child; and
Repeated threats to cause physical pain to any person in whom the aggrieved person is interested.

Sexual violence

Includes any conduct of a sexual nature that abuses, humiliates, degrades or otherwise violates
the dignity of woman;

● Forced intercourse
● Forced you to look at pornography or any other obscene pictures or materials
● Any act of sexual nature to abuse, humiliate or degrade you or which is otherwise
violative of your dignity or any other unwelcome conduct of sexual natur.
● Child sexual abuse

Financial abuse/Economic abuse such as not providing money for maintaining woman or her
children. Not providing food, clothes, medicines etc. forcing her out of the house. Preventing
from accessing or using any part of the house, preventing from carrying on employment, non-
payment of rent etc. non payment of other bills such as electricity. Forcibly taking away salary.

DOMESTIC RELATIONSHIP: a relationship between two persons who live or have, at any
point of time, lived together in a shared household,

When they are related by consanguinity, marriage, or through a relationship in the nature of
marriage, adoption or are family members living together as a joint family

The amount or period of time lived together by the petitioner and respondent is not necessary in
terms of that the petitioner and respondent should live or have lived together for a particular
period of time. Hence, application by lady, for maintenance, from a man with whom she shared a
close relationship is maintainable, M. Palani v. Meenakshi, 2008 SCC Online Mad 150.

The Supreme Court had observed in one of the cases that judicial separation does not change the
status of the wife as an ―aggrieved person‖ under Section 2(a) read with Section 12 and does not
end the ―domestic relationship‖ under Section 2(f). It stated that judicial separation is
mere suspension of husband-wife relationship and not a complete severance of relationship as
happens in divorce, Krishna Bhattacharjee v. Sarathi Choudhury
Indra Sarma v. V.K.V Sarma - The Supreme Court further stated that the word domestic
relationship means a relationship that has some inherent or essential characteristics of marriage
though not a marriage that is legally recognized. Expression ―relationship in the nature
of marriage‖ cannot be construed in the abstract. It is to be taken in the context in which it
appears and to be applied bearing in mind the purpose and object of DV Act as well as meaning
of the expression ―in the nature of marriage‖,

SHARED HOUSEHOLD: means household where the person aggrieved lives or at any stage has
lived in a domestic relationship either singly or along with the respondent. And includes owned
or tenanted either singly or jointly by the aggrieved person and the respondent. And includes
such a household which may belong to the joint family of which respondent is a member.

TO WHOM CAN AN INFORMATION/COMPLAINT BE GIVEN?

Information may be given and complaint can be given to a police officer/Protection

officer/Service provider (NGO) or Magistrate.

Protection Officer

Under Section 8 of the DV Act, the Protection Officer is appointed by the State Government as
per the provisions of the law. The Protection Officer acts as a facilitator between the aggrieved
woman and the court. The Protection Officer aids the aggrieved woman in filing of complaints,
and application before the Magistrate to obtain the necessary relief and also assists to obtain
medical aid, legal aid, counselling, safe shelter and other required assistance.

Duties of Protection Officer

Section 9 of the DV Act lays down the duties of the Protection Officer as follows:

―(a) to assist the Magistrate in the discharge of his functions under this Act;

(b) to make a domestic incident report to the Magistrate, in such form and in such manner as may
be prescribed, upon receipt of a complaint of domestic violence and forward copies thereof to the
police officer in charge of the police station within the local limits of whose jurisdiction
domestic violence is alleged to have been committed and to the service providers in that area;
(c) to make an application in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed to the
Magistrate, if the aggrieved person so desires, claiming relief for issuance of a protection order;

(d) to ensure that the aggrieved person is provided legal aid under the Legal Services Authorities
Act, 1987 and make available free of cost the prescribed form in which a complaint is to be
made;

(e) to maintain a list of all service providers providing legal aid or counselling, shelter homes and
medical facilities in a local area within the jurisdiction of the Magistrate;

(f) to make available a safe shelter home, if the aggrieved person so requires and forward a copy
of his report of having lodged the aggrieved person in a shelter home to the police station and the
Magistrate having jurisdiction in the area where the shelter home is situated;

(g) to get the aggrieved person medically examined, if she has sustained bodily injuries and
forward a copy of the medical report to the police station and the Magistrate having jurisdiction
in the area where the domestic violence is alleged to have been taken place;

(h) to ensure that the order for monetary relief under Section 20 is complied with and executed,
in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of
1974);

(i) to perform such other duties as may be prescribed.‖

Service Providers

A victim of domestic violence may require various services such as shelter home or safe
accommodation, medical aid, child care, legal aid services and other community services.
According to Section 10(1) of DV Act, the Service Providers are the NGOs, Companies or
voluntary organizations working in the field of domestic violence and are registered under the
laws of the State. Service Providers are duty bound to provide assistance and support to women
facing domestic violence. A woman can go to a registered Service Provider to make a complaint
under the DV Act. The duty of the service provider, as provided under Section 6 of the DV Act,
upon receipt of request should be to provide shelter to the aggrieved person in the shelter home.

DOMESTIC INCIDENT REPORT

Upon receipt of a complaint of domestic violence, the protection officer or the service provider
has to prepare a DIR in form 1 as provided in act and submit it to the magistrate and copies of
the same to the police officer in charge of the concerned police station.

Filing a Complaint of Domestic Violence

An aggrieved woman, in order to file a complaint for domestic violence may:

● Approach the police station and register the complaint, or

● File a complaint to a Protection Officer or Service Provider, or

● Directly approach the Magistrate.

The duties of the police officers, Protection officer, Service Provider, or the Magistrate is laid
down under Section 5 of the Act. It states that, upon receipt of complaint they shall inform the
aggrieved person—

―(a) of her right to make an application for obtaining a relief by way of a protection order, an
order for monetary relief, a custody order, a residence order, a compensation order or more than
one such order under this Act;

(b) of the availability of services of service providers;

(c) of the availability of services of the Protection Officers;

(d) of her right to free legal services under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 ;

(e) of her right to file a complaint under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code , wherever
relevant‖

Which Court can decide the case

Section 27 of the DV Act provides that a first class magistrate or metropolitan court shall be the
competent court to grant a protection order and other orders under the DV Act and to try
offences under the Act within the local limits of which
(a) the person aggrieved permanently or temporarily resides or carries on business or is
employed; or

(b) the respondent resides or carries on business or is employed; or

(c) the cause of action has arisen.

Shyamlal Devda v. Parimala - In a recent decision, the Supreme Court held that petition under
DV Act can be filed in a court where ―person aggrieved‖ permanently or temporarily resides or
carries on business or is employed,

REMEDIES

 Protection orders - Section 18

A magistrate can issue a protection order which prohibits a respondent from committing
domestic violence and other acts. Often called a stop violence order.

 Residence order - Section 19

Residence orders restricting the respondent from removing the woman from a shared household
can be issued.

 Monetary relief - Section 20

A magistrate can offer monetary reliefs like compensation for loss of earning or reimbursement
of medical expenses owing to domestic violence.

 Custody orders - Section 21

A magistrate can issue temporary custody orders in favour of the woman

 Compensation Orders (Section 22)

The Magistrate may on an application being made by the aggrieved person, pass an order
directing the respondent to pay compensation and damages for the injuries, including mental
torture and emotional distress, caused by the acts of domestic violence committed by that
respondent.
 LANDMARK JUDGMENTS

Lalita Toppo v. the State of Jharkhand

Facts of the case

In the case of Lalita Toppo v. the State of Jharkhand and Anr. (2018), which was heard by the
Supreme Court of India, the Complainant, who was not the Respondent‘s legally wedded wife,
approached the Court to obtain maintenance under the provisions of the Protection of Women
from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, supposing that she will not be allowed to maintenance under
Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

In this instance, the Appellant was in a live-in relationship, with whom she had a kid. When the
couple got separated, the Appellant sought support from her spouse, for which the Family Court
allowed, giving her Rs 2000 per month and Rs 1000 to her child. The Appellant filed an appeal
in the High Court, which found the family court‘s ruling to be incorrect and ruled in favour of
the partner. The Appellant then went to the Supreme Court.

Issue involved in the case

 Whether a live-in partner can seek maintenance under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005?

Judgement

the Supreme Court observed that a live-in partner will be obligated to even more relief than that
envisaged by Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Making reference to the
provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, the bench noted that the petitioner in the case would
have a remedy to seek maintenance under the Act despite the fact that she is not the legally
wedded wife and thus not obligated to be maintained under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure. It was also observed by the Court that domestic violence, according to the provisions
of the Domestic Violence Act, also includes economic abuse.

Hiralal P. Harsora and Ors v. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora and Ors, (2016)

Facts of the case

The plaintiffs were Pushpa Narottam Harsora and Kusum Narottam Harsora, a mother-daughter
duo. They filed a complaint against Pradeep (son/brother), his wife, and her two sisters, alleging
that the four of them subjected them to domestic abuse. The Respondents urged the Metropolitan
Magistrate to release Pradeep‘s wife and two sisters/daughters since, according to Section 2(q),
a complaint may only be filed against an ―adult male.‖ The Respondents‘ application was
denied.

The Bombay High Court ruled that Section 2(q) of the aforementioned Act should be read in
light of the definitions contained in Sections 2(a), 2(f), and 2(s) of the Protection of Women from
Domestic Violence Act. Essentially, this assured that a complaint could be lodged against female
family members as well as the ―adult male member.‖ However, a complaint alleging domestic
abuse cannot be brought primarily against the female members of the household. A co-
Respondent must be an adult male. As a result, the Court did not read down the term ―adult
male person.‖ After this the mother and daughter duo filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court.

Issue involved in the case

 Whether females can be liable under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005?

Judgement given by the Court

The Supreme Court struck down adult male from the concept of ‗Respondent,‘ holding that it is
not founded on any intelligible differentia having a rational nexus with the purpose sought to be
attained. In the same instance, the Supreme Court clarified that women and non-adults are among
the people who can seek redress under the DV Act. The word ―Respondent‖ in Section 2(q) or
those who can be considered perpetrators of violence against women/against whom remedies
under the DV Act are enforceable cannot be limited to the phrase ―adult male person‖ in Section
2(q). As a result, remedies under the DV Act are accessible even against female members and
non-adults.

Sandhya Wankhede v. Manoj Bhimrao Wankhede, (2011)

Facts of the case

In the case of after getting married in 2005, the Appellant Sandhya lived with R1, R2, and R3 for
nearly a year, which caused problems in her marriage. R2 and R3 are mother in law and sister in
law. She filed a police report against her husband under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code
for assaulting her. She also filed an application against all three Respondents, which the First
Class Judicial Magistrate granted, directing R1 to pay the monthly maintenance. All Respondents
were also barred from trying to evict the Complainant from her matrimonial home. Criminal
appeals and applications filed by R1 before the Sessions Judge and the High Court were denied.
R2 and R3 applied to the First Class Magistrate, but their request was denied. They filed an
appeal, claiming that women cannot be considered Respondents in DV proceedings. The Court
agreed and overturned the order, enabling Appellant to be evicted from her marriage home,
which was solely owned by R2. As a result, it was not a ―shared house.‖ However, the Court
compelled R1 to offer separate lodging or make further payment for it as an alternative. The
Appellant‘s appeal in Sessions Court was replied based on the decision that ―females‖ are not
included within ‗Respondents.

The HC took a similar stance, deleting R2 and R3‘s names from the proceedings and ordering
the Appellant to quit the matrimonial home. Hence this appeal was made.

Issue involved in the case

 Whether a complaint can be filed under the Domestic Violence Act only against an adult
male person and not against the husband‘s female relatives, i.e. mother-in-law and sister-
in-law?

Judgement given by the Court

However, in the aforementioned instance, the Supreme Court resolved the question by ruling that
the provision to Section 2(q) that doesn‘t exclude female relatives of the husband or male partner
from the scope of a complaint that can be submitted under the Domestic Violence Act. As a
result, complaints can be filed not only against the adult male person, but also against the adult
male‘s female relative.

Ajay Kumar v. Lata @ Sharuti, (2019)

Facts of the case

In this case, the Appellant Lata is the Respondent‘s brother-in-law, i.e. his brother‘s widow, and
they used to live together in a Hindu Joint Family Property. According to the lawsuit filed in the
Supreme Court, there seem to be no rules in the Act that requires the Appellant to pay
maintenance to the Brother‘s wife. Only if they were in a business partnership would he be
obligated to pay the maintenance.

Section 12(1) of the DV Act states that a person may approach a magistrate for relief or financial
relief to compensate for loss sustained by her or her child as a result of domestic violence,
however, this does not include the order of maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure or any other law. The lady said that after her husband died, she was not
permitted to dwell in her matrimonial house and was driven out with her kid, and she now has no
means of support for herself and her child.

Issue involved in the case

 Whether brother-in-law comes under the definition of ―Respondent‖ under Section 2(q)
of the DV Act?

Judgement given by the Court

In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, maintenance
to a widow can also be provided by a brother-in-law. The Supreme Court rejected the
Appellant‘s allegation that Section 2(q) of the Protection Women from DV Act defines
―Respondent‖ as any adult male individual who is or has been in a domestic relationship with a
partner against whom the remedy is sought. The Supreme Court drafted a domestic connection
between the woman and her brother-in-law, stating that the brother-in-law and the woman are a
joint family.

Satish Chander Ahuja vs Sneha Ahuja(2020)

The petitioner had filed the suit for the removal of his daughter-in-law from the suit premises
after her divorce from his son. He had relied on the case of S.R. Batra and Anr. Vs. Taruna Batra,
where the Supreme Court had ruled that under DV act the property of husband‘s property which
was not a joint family property did not come within the meaning of shared household. The
landmark judgment overruled the judgement of S.R. Batra and Anr. Vs. Taruna Batra case and
held that the definition provided for the shared household in Section 2(s) of the DV Act was
exhaustive in nature. It was held that the certain criteria needs to be established for the
determination of whether a suit property was shared household or not:

a. The aggrieved person under the said Act resided or was residing in the premise during the
period when the domestic relationship existed.

b. The property was required to belong to the joint family of which the aggrieved person is a
part.