Author : Shreya Mishra, National Law Institute University, Bhopal
Introduction
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as The DV Act) was strictly drafted to provide a remedy in civil law for the protection of women and to prevent the occurrence of domestic violence in society. Its sole intention is to protect women irrespective of the relationship she shares with the accused. However, even today, a significant number of victims remain unaware of how to invoke the provisions of the Act to safeguard themselves from such abuse. Therefore, this blog tries to provide an acute understanding of how the DV Act operates and how women can access the protections it guarantees.
What is the Domestic Violence Act, 2005?
The DV Act is meant to provide for more effective protection of the rights of women guaranteed under the Constitution who are victims of violence of any kind occurring within the family and matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
What Constitutes Domestic Violence?
Under this section, the focus is on the criterion to label an act as domestic violence, essentially what types of abuse are covered under this act.
The honorable court had underscored recently that there are various types of domestic violence, i.e., physical, mental, sexual, verbal, emotional, and economic. Section 3 of the Act specifically provides the answer for this query. It mentions that any act, omission, commission, or conduct of the respondent shall constitute domestic violence in case it:
(a) harms or injures or endangers the health, safety, life, limb, or well-being, whether mental or physical, of the aggrieved person or tends to do so and includes causing physical abuse, sexual abuse, verbal and emotional abuse, and economic abuse; or
(b) harasses, harms, injures, or endangers the aggrieved person with a view to coerce her or any other person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any dowry or other property or valuable security; or
(c) has the effect of threatening the aggrieved person or any person related to her by any conduct mentioned in clause (a) or clause (b); or
(d) otherwise injures or causes harm, whether physical or mental, to the aggrieved person.
The court in the Bhartiben Tamboli Case had succinctly laid down the meaning of all these different types of domestic violence, wherein it had stated the following:
Physical Abuse:
Physical abuse is the use of physical force against a woman in a way that causes her bodily injury or hurt. Physical assault, criminal intimidation, and criminal force are also forms of physical abuse like beating, kicking, punching, throwing objects, damaging property, punched walls, kicked doors, abandoning her in a dangerous or unfamiliar place, using a weapon to threaten or hurt her, forcing her to leave the matrimonial home, hurting her children, using physical force in sexual situations.
Sexual Abuse:
Sexual abuse is also a form of physical abuse. Any situation in which a woman is forced to participate in unwanted, safe, or degrading sexual activity, calling her sexual names, hurting a woman with objects and weapons during sex, is sexual abuse. Forced sex, even by a spouse or intimate partner with whom she has consensual sex, is an act of aggression and violence.
Emotional Abuse:
Not all abusive relationships involve violence. Many women suffer from emotional abuse, which is no less destructive. Unfortunately, emotional abuse is often minimized or overlooked—even by the woman being abused. Emotional abuse includes verbal abuse such as yelling, name-calling, blaming, and shaming. Isolation, intimidation, and controlling behaviour also fall under emotional abuse. Calls her names, insults her, or continually criticizes her.
Economic Abuse:
Economic abuse is not a very recognized form of abuse among women, but it is very detrimental. Economic abuse mainly includes a woman not being provided with enough money by her partner to maintain herself and her children, which may comprise money for food, clothing, medicines, etc., and not allowing a woman to take up employment. Forcing her out of the house where she lives and not providing her rent, in case of a rented sharehold, also amounts to abuse. Depriving her of all or any economic or financial resources to which the person is entitled under the law or custom, restricting the woman’s access to the shared household. Disposing or alienating the assets of the women whether movable or immovable, valuables, shares, securities, bonds, and the like other property in which she may have an interest. However, seeking maintenance to unjustly enrich oneself and that too without providing the alleged act of domestic violence is a gross abuse of the process of law.
Who Can File a Complaint Under This Act?
Any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of domestic violence by the respondent becomes an “aggrieved person” by the virtue of Section 2(a) of the act and therefore can file a complaint under this act. In fact, as per Section 4 of the act, any person who has reason to believe that an act of domestic violence has been, or is being, or is likely to be committed, may give information about it to the concerned Protection Officer.
Confusion regarding whether a woman in a live-in relationship can file such a complaint persisted until the apex court in D. Veluswamy v. D. Patchaiammal enumerated five ingredients to be fulfilled for a woman of a live-in relationship to file a complaint under the said act:
1. Both parties must behave as husband and wife and are recognized as husband and wife in front of society.
2. They must be of a valid legal age of marriage.
3. They should qualify to enter into marriage, e.g., none of the partners should have a spouse living at the time of entering into the relationship.
4. They must have voluntarily cohabited for a significant period of time.
5. They must have lived together in a shared household.
Against Whom Can Such a Complaint Be Filed?
The answer lies in Section 2(q) of the act, which asserts that 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 relief under the Act, can be a respondent for such a complaint. 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. 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 act.
The honorable court had asserted in The Baban Foke Case that hypothetically, if a mother-in-law or an unmarried sister, or for that matter even a married sister of the husband who have been staying together or otherwise in the same shared household, if they indulge in any of these abuses, one cannot comprehend as to why they should be excluded from being respondents in a proceeding launched by the wife under Section 12 of the Act. There could be physical abuse at the hands of the mother-in-law as well as the sister-in-laws. Similarly, there could be verbal as well as emotional abuse as also economic abuse. Depriving a widowed woman from sharing a family household or from having her share in the joint family property or pressurizing her to relinquish her share could be some such instances where one can easily comprehend the role which could be easily attributable to even the female members of the family.
What’s worth pointing out here is, in the case of Hiralal P. Harsora Vs. Kusum Narottamdas Harsora, it was held that the words ‘adult male person’ are contrary to the object of affording protection to women who suffered from domestic violence of any kind, and the word expression ‘adult male’ is substituted by “any person.”
Where to and How to File a Domestic Violence Complaint?
Such a complaint can be registered to a police officer, protection officer, service provider, or magistrate. One can approach a police officer to file a complaint. The Police, on receipt of complaints of Domestic Violence, will simultaneously direct the victim to the Protection Officer after informing her of the rights and reliefs available under the Act, which ensures relief in the briefest possible time to her. The Protection Officer will prepare a Domestic Incident Report (DIR) and then will file an application before the Magistrate to issue a Protection Order. The Magistrate may issue notice to both parties to appear within 3 days and consider issuing a Protection Order for a fixed period.
What Are the Remedies That Can Be Availed Under This Act?
As pointed out by the court, a significant object of the legislation is to provide for and recognize the rights of women to secure housing and to recognize the right of a woman to reside in a matrimonial home or a shared household, whether or not she has any title or right in the shared household. As per Section 5 of the DV Act, a police officer, protection officer, service provider, or Magistrate who has received a complaint of domestic violence or is otherwise present at the place of an incident of domestic violence or when the incident of domestic violence is reported to him, 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 (39 of 1987);
(e) of her right to file a complaint under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), wherever relevant.
In Kunapareddy v Kunapareddy, the court categorically mentioned every detail about availing relief under this act. It stated that:
“Procedure for obtaining order of reliefs is stipulated in Chapter IV of the DV Act, which comprises Sections 12 to 29. Under Section 12, an application can be made to the Magistrate by the aggrieved person or Protection Officer or any other person on behalf of the aggrieved person. The Magistrate is empowered, under Section 18, to pass a protection order. Section 19 of the DV Act authorizes the Magistrate to pass a residence order, which may include restraining the respondent from dispossessing or disturbing the possession of the aggrieved person or directing the respondent to remove himself from the shared household or even restraining the respondent or his relatives from entering the portion of the shared household in which the aggrieved person resides, etc. Monetary reliefs which can be granted by the Magistrate under Section 20 of the DV Act include giving of the relief in respect of the loss of earnings, the medical expenses, the loss caused due to destruction, damage, or removal of any property from the control of the aggrieved person and the maintenance for the aggrieved person as well as her children, if any. Custody can be decided by the Magistrate, which was granted under Section 21 of the DV Act. Section 22 empowers the Magistrate to grant compensation and damages for the injuries, including mental torture and emotional distress, caused by the domestic violence committed by the appellant.”
Footnotes
[^1]: Indra Sarma v V.K.V Sarma, (2013) 15 SCC 755 [15]
[^2]: Bhartiben Bipinbhai Tamboli v State of Gujarat & 3, (2018) SCC OnLine Guj 9 [22]
[^3]: THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, 2005
[^4]: Sunil Gangadhar Kadam and Others v Jayashri Sunil Kadam and Another (2023) SCC OnLine Bom 656 [7]
[^5]: THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT 2005, s 3
[^6]: Bhartiben Bipinbhai Tamboli v State of Gujarat & 3, (2018) SCC OnLine Guj 9
[^7]: THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT 2005, s 4
[^8]: D. Veluswamy vs. D. Patchaiammal, AIR 2011 SC 479 [31]
[^9]: THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT 2005, s 2(q)
[^10]: Sandhya Manoj Wankhede vs. Manoj Bhimrao Wankhede (2011) 3 SCC 650 [14]
[^11]: Sandhya Manoj Wankhede vs. Manoj Bhimrao Wankhede (2011) 3 SCC 650 [16]
[^12]: Baban Trimbak Foke and Others v State of Maharashtra, 2018 SCC Online Bom 1474
[^13]: Baban Trimbak Foke and Others v State of Maharashtra, 2018 SCC Online Bom 1474 [12].
[^14]: AIR 2016 SC 4774 [39]
[^15]: THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT 2005 s 5
[^16]: Police Headquarters Kerala, Circular No 14/2009: Protection of Women from Domestic Violence — Role of Police — Instructions issued (D4/74502/2008, 29 March 2009)
[^17]: Ramapada Basak and Another v State of West Bengal and Others, 2021 SCC OnLine Cal 2161 [5]
[^18]: THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT 2005, s 5
[^19]: Kunapareddy v Kunapareddy Swarna Kumari and Others, 2016 SCC Online SC 531, [13]
© 2025 Powered by Digi Grow Solutions | Design by Hasan Jafer
