Have to follow Delhi high court order on domestic violence Act, says Bombay high court | PIL seeks to grant all women in house power to use Domestic Violence Act

Have to follow Delhi high court order on domestic violence Act, says Bombay high court

Pushpa (L) and her daughter Kusum filed the PIL

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Thursday was informed that the Delhi high court has upheld the inclusion of a mother of a male abuser for relief under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, and also that the Supreme Court had rejected an appeal filed against this order.

A division bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice M S Sonak heard a petition by Kusum Harsora (54) and her 78-year-old mother challenging the exclusion of women, other than wife/live-in partner, of a male abuser. A magistrate had rejected their complaint against a sister-in-law and Kusum's two sisters on the grounds that a mother and sister do not qualify as "aggrieved persons" under the Act. Kusum informed the court that the Delhi HC in Kusumlata Sharma versus State of Delhi (NCR) on September 2, 2011, had held that that a mother-in-law is also entitled to file a domestic violence complaint against her daughter-in-law.

"While the Delhi HC does not say about a sister, but it is understood to include her. We'll have to follow the (Delhi HC) order," said Justice Shah.

But the Centre's advocate, Dhiren Shah, sought time to "confirm" the SC order and if the women and child welfare development ministry knew of it. The next hearing is on June 17.

Source - http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Have-to-follow-Delhi-high-court-order-on-domestic-violence-Act-says-Bombay-high-court/articleshow/36451699.cms

----

PIL seeks to grant all women in house power to use Domestic Violence Act

Women in a household other than a daughter-in-law or a live-in partner could be allowed to file a case under the Domestic Violence (DV) Act if the Bombay High Court rules in favour of a Public Interest Litigation currently before it. 

A division bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice M S Sonak on Thursday gave the central government five days to verify if the Supreme Court had passed any order on the issue.

The court was hearing a PIL filed by a mother-daughter duo who are challenging the validity of Section 2(q) of the DV Act, which restricts the definition of a respondent to male members of the family. The PIL, filed by Kusum Harsora, 54, and her mother Pushpa, 78, says the section discriminates between women living in the same household.

During the hearing on Thursday, Kusum argued on the basis of details given in the PIL and later submitted a 2013 Delhi High Court judgment in which a mother-in-law was allowed to file a complaint under the DV Act against her daughter-in-law.

The court then asked the Union government's advocate, Dhiren Shah, to verify if there was any Supreme Court judgment on the issue and to inform the court of this after the lunch-break. The advocates informed the court that there was one SC judgment that could help Kusum but they wanted time to verify the facts.

The PIL says that both petitioners had lodged a complaint against Kusum's brother, sister-in-law and two sisters for subjecting them to mental and physical harassment. But in February 2012, a single-judge bench of the HC discharged all three women, holding that no complaint under the DV Act can be filed against the female members.

The mother-daughter petition challenges this very provision, saying that though the legislation is supposed to protect women from domestic violence, it discriminates between two women in a domestic relationship.

According to the PIL, while the provision allows a wife or a woman in a live-in relationship to file a complaint against her husband or male partner and/or any of his relatives, it does not allow other women in a domestic relationship to lodge a complaint and seek relief against other female members of the family. This would include a daughter-in-law, sister or daughter.

"The proviso ignores the fact that even female members of the family can be perpetrators of domestic violence. There is no rational basis of classification between a wife or a woman in a live-in relationship and other females of the family," says the PIL.

On Wednesday, the Union government had filed an affidavit saying that allowing a man's female relatives to seek relief under the said Act could make it prone to misuse. Though the affidavit agreed that women other than wives or partners were also susceptible to domestic violence, it denied that the Act causes undue hardship to other women in the house.

Source - http://www.mumbaimirror.com/mumbai/crime/PIL-seeks-to-grant-all-women-in-house-power-to-use-Domestic-Violence-Act/articleshow/36452656.cms

***

Delhi court –PWDVA-MIL SIL can file PWDVA on Bahu ?-'Mother, sisters protected equal to man's wife'

Delhi court –PWDVA-MIL SIL can file PWDVA on Bahu ?-'Mother, sisters protected equal to man's wife'

PTI

19 Sep 2010

NEW DELHI: The mother and sisters of a man are equally protected in a dispute with his wife under the Domestic Violence Act and they cannot be made accused without a scrutiny of charges against them, a Delhi court has said.

"The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 protects the mothers, sisters and daughters from any kind of physical and mental abuse or violence in as much as it does the daughter-in-law. The court as a protector and implementor of rights, is required to perform a balancing act," Additional Sessions Judge Kamini Lau.

The court said that raising allegations by a woman against her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law without any substance would rather cause violence to them.

"Making wild allegations against an unmarried sister-in-law of a tender marriageable age by an estranged wife of brother tantamounts to inflicting violence upon her and it is the duty of the court to ensure that she is protected from the same.

"Violence can also be inflicted by an estranged wife or daughter-in-law or sister-in-law upon other members of the husband's family to gain and secure personal points and financial control or for separating her husband from his parents and other family members," the court said.

It further said that mother-in-law or sisters-in-law (married or unmarried) cannot be permitted to be subjected to harassment only because they happen to be related to the estranged husband of the woman (complainant).

"It is necessary to ensure the court does not get swayed by astute legal drafting of the counsel and is required to get at the truth of the allegations by examining them on the touch-stone of reasonableness and probabilities. Where a complaint appears to have been filed on grounds only to humiliate the family members, the same is required to be thrown out at the earliest opportunity", the court said.

The court made these observations while setting aside an order to summon the mother, two sisters-in-law including the married one of a man on a complaint filed by his wife alleging harassment.

ASJ Lau pointed out that the complainant alleged that her in-law had forcibly taken away her salary and wages which is false and incorrect as she herself admitted that she was not working. The court also said that the allegations regarding harassment for dowry do not appear to be "credible and truthful" particularly in view of the background that the marriage between the sparring couple was a secret, runaway marriage as an outcome of a love affair between them.

The woman said that she had married the man in July, 2008 and had faced harassment and torture for dowry.

 

http://expressbuzz.com/nation/mother-sisters-protected-equal-to-mans-wife/208156.html

Mom-in-law safe from Domestic Violence Act

Mom-in-law safe from Domestic Violence Act

BANGALORE: Can a woman try another woman under the provisions of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005? No, says the Karnataka High Court.

Clearing this confusion, the division Bench comprising Justice K L Manjunath and Justice B S Patil said a complaint under this act against her mother-in-law or sister-in-law or women relatives can be registered, but the police can initiate action against them (respondents) only under Section 498A of the IPC or any other suitable enactments of law.

The Bench gave this clarification while dealing with the petition filed by one Leelavati.

In respect of residential rights, custody rights or protection, women can file complaints against only male members under the Domestic Violence Act but not against female members like mother-in-law or sisters-in-law or any others, the division Bench clarified with regard to ambiguity of the meaning of the word relative, in the proviso in section 2(q) of the Act.

Leelavati, a resident of Okalipuram, had filed complaints against her husbandBhaskar, father-in-law Murugeshan, mother-in-law Nalini and sister-in-law Kavitha under this Act, before the magistrate court. This was challenged by her husband and others. The fast track court had ordered that except Bhaskar's, other names should be dropped from the complaint.

Leelavati challenged this decision before the high court. The single bench, while concurring with the fast track court, referred this matter to the division bench for clarification.

 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bangalore/Mom-in-law-safe-from-Domestic-Violence-Act/articleshow/6526918.cms#ixzz0z7ZVcPxs

also @

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/95506/women-cant-respondents-hc.html
Women can't be respondents: HC

Bangalore, September 9, DHNS:
In a judgment that is bound to have wide social implications, a division bench of the High Court has ruled that a case filed under the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 cannot include women as respondents. 

A division bench comprising Justice K L Manjunath and Justice B S Patil has ruled that "the definition of the term 'respondent' as defined under Section 2(q) of the Act, does not include a female relative of the husband or the male partner of the aggrieved female or a female living in a relationship of the nature of a marriage."

The ruling stands apart from the ruling of four other High Courts of the country including the Delhi High Court. The matter had been referred to the division bench by a single judge to define the term 'respondent' following a petition filed by Leelavathi S against her father-in-law Murugesh, her mother-in-law Nalini and her sister-in-law Kavitha under the Domestic Violence Act.

The debate on the inclusion or exclusion of women as respondents under this Act has been a long standing one. Many have felt that the Act, which was meant to protect women also has become a tool for targeting women. The Indian Penal Code already allows a case to be filed against women under Section 498A for dowry harassment. A complaint filed under Domestic Violence Act also provides for the respondent to be removed from the shared household or can be prevented from entering the household