oppn parties Domestic Violence: Bringing Women of Household Under the Ambit

News Snippets

  • Supreme Court holds hotels liable for theft of vehicle from their parking area if parked by valet, says "owner's risk" clause is not a shield from such liability
  • Finance Minister says she is receiving feedback from many sectors that recovery is happening as there is lower stress
  • Sabarimala temple opens, but police bar the entry of women below 50 years
  • Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman says Air India and BPCL to be sold off by March
  • Media person Rajat Sharma resigns as DDCA president
  • Shiv Sena, NCP and Congress postpone meeting the governor of Maharashtra
  • Shiv Sena not to attend the NDA meeting on 17th November, says break up "a formality"
  • Shiv Sena says that the confidence the BJP is showing about forming the government in Maharashtra is based purely on its expectation of getting numbers through horse trading
  • Anil Ambani resigns as director of the bankrupt Reliance Communications
  • India beat Bangladesh by an innings and 150 rums inside three days in the first Test. Indian pacers excel after Mayank Agarwal's double century
  • Sena-NCP-Congress work out a common minimum programme, will form the government soon and it will last 5 years, says Sharad Pawar
  • Income Tax Appellate Tribunal upholds the decision to withdraw the charitable status of Young India, making it liable to pay Rs 145 in income tax. Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Vadra are the majority shareholders in the company
  • CBI raids offices of Amnesty International across India
  • Supreme Court quashes NCLAT order against Arcelor Mittal and paves the way for the company to take over ailing Essar Steel
  • Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman says concerns of telcos will be addressed and no company will close down
Two Muslim litigants in Ayodhya refuse to accept the Supreme Court order, say review petition might be filed
oppn parties
Domestic Violence: Bringing Women of Household Under the Ambit

By Sunil Garodia

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Writes for a number of publications.
There was a loophole in The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act) that allowed male members of the family to harass and perpetuate violent acts on women by hiding behind other women or juvenile (but nearly adult) members of the household. Section 2(q) of the said act prescribed that ““respondent” means any adult male person who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person and against whom the aggrieved person has sought any relief under this Act: Provided that an aggrieved wife or female living in a relationship in the nature of a marriage may also file a complaint against a relative of the husband or the male partner.” It is often seen that the female members of the household – in the form of mother-in-law, sisters-in-law or their female children in the age group of 16 to 18 years – are in the forefront of direct physical violence or mental torture of the aggrieved person.

Since the act clearly named respondents to be “adult” and “male,” these female members of the household, despite being partners in crime, escaped both scrutiny and punishment. Now, in the case Hiral P Harsora & ors v Kusum Narottamdas Harsora & ors, the Supreme Court has struck down the words adult and male from the definition of respondent under the said section. It also deleted the proviso to the section as it was rendered otiose on change of definition. The court said that the previous definition was too narrow and it provided an escape route to the family. It also said that “the classification of “adult male person” clearly subverts the doctrine of equality, by restricting the reach of a social beneficial statute meant to protect women against all forms of domestic violence.”

If we look at the intention of the legislature, it is clear that the D V Act was enacted as a form of protection for women who faced abuse and eviction at home. While the lawmakers had thought that this abuse and eviction would be perpetuated by the male members of the household and hence provided for the deleted definition, the ground reality was different. Female members of the household, either being there with the victim 24X7 or being used as willing tools by the male members were seen to be more active in such crime. Sometimes, females members as young as 16 or 17 years were made to inflict torture on the victim. Hence, the decision of the court to delete both the words will broaden the reach of the section. It would go a long way in reducing domestic violence by the female members of the household as they will now be liable to criminal prosecution.