Whether complaint under domestic violence Act can be filed against female relative of husband?

 It is true that the expression "female" has not been used in the proviso to Section 2(q) also, but, on the other hand, if the Legislature intended to exclude females from the ambit of the complaint, which can be filed by an aggrieved wife, females would have been specifically excluded, instead of it being provided in the proviso that a complaint could also be filed against a relative of the husband or the male partner. No restrictive meaning has been given to the expression "relative", nor has the said expression been specifically defined in the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, to make it specific to males only.

14. In such circumstances, it is clear that the legislature never intended to exclude female relatives of the husband or male partner from the ambit of a complaint that can be made under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

15. In our view, both the Sessions Judge and the High Court went wrong in holding otherwise, possibly being influenced by the definition of the expression "respondent" in the main body of Section 2(q) of the aforesaid Act.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Crl. A. No. 271 of 2011

Decided On: 31.01.2011

 Sandhya Manoj Wankhade Vs.  Manoj Bhimrao Wankhade and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram: 

Altamas Kabir and Cyriac Joseph, JJ.

Print Page

Whether Domestic Violence Act can be invoked against female relatives of the husband?

14. Section 2(q) reads as under :-

"2(q) "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;"

15. It is, therefore, apparent that though Section 2(q) indicates that the "respondent" would mean any adult male person in connection with domestic relationship with the aggrieved person, the proviso indicates that the aggrieved wife or female, living in a relationship in the nature of a marriage, may also arraign in a complaint, a relative of the husband or the male partner. Since, the 2005 Act is aimed at protecting women against domestic violence, the submissions of the petitioners, if are accepted, would create an insulation to the female members of the husband's family who may go unpunished for acts amounting to domestic violence.

16. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sandhya Manoj Wankhade vs. Manoj Bhimrao Wankhade & Anr. (2011) 3 SCC 650 has dealt with the issue as to whether Section 2(q) and the proviso thereunder, read with Sections 12, 18, 19, 20 and 22 of the 2005 Act, would restrict the meaning of the term "respondent" only to the extent of the husband or male partner or only male members of the family or male relatives..

17. Paragraph Nos. 13 to 18 of the Sandhya Judgment (supra) read as under :-

"13. Having carefully considered the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties, we are unable to sustain the decisions, both of the learned Sessions Judge as also the High Court, in relation to the interpretation of the expression "respondent" in Section 2(q) of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. For the sake of reference, Section 2(q) of the above-said Act is extracted hereinbelow :-

"2(q). "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."

14. From the above definition it would be apparent that although Section 2(q) defines a respondent to mean any adult male person, who is or has been in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person, the proviso widens the scope of the said definition by including a relative of the husband or male partner within the scope of a complaint, which may be filed by an aggrieved wife or a female living in a relationship in the nature of a marriage.

15. It is true that the expression "female" has not been used in the proviso to Section 2(q) also, but, on the other hand, if the Legislature intended to exclude females from the ambit of the complaint, which can be filed by an aggrieved wife, females would have been specifically excluded, instead of it being provided in the proviso that a complaint could also be filed against a relative of the husband or the male partner.

16. No restrictive meaning has been given to the expression "relative", nor has the said expression been specifically defined in the Domestic Violence Act , 2005, to make it specific to males only. In such circumstances, it is clear that the legislature never intended to exclude female relatives of the husband or male partner from the ambit of a complaint that can be made under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3069 OF 2015

Mr. Prashant Pandit Salve vs. Mrs. Suvarna Prashant Salve 

CORAM: RAVINDRA V.GHUGE, J.
DATE : 11th July, 2016.

Print Page