Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
The main aim of the Domestic Violence Act is to provide civil remedies to women in domestic relationships, and the respondent arraying should be based on clear, specific allegations of violence or coercive acts ["Rajesh VS Station House Officer Adoor Police Station - Kerala"], ["Monish Chhabra, S/o. Sri Madanlal Chhabra vs State Of Assam, rep. By The PP, Assam - Gauhati"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
References:- ["Rajesh VS Station House Officer Adoor Police Station - Kerala"]- ["FATHIMA MARY vs PATTENRAJ (DIED) - Madras"]- ["Saroja VS State rep. by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Pollachi - Madras"]- ["Hitesh Mahanta, S/o. Late Satish Mahanta VS State of Assam, Represented by the Public Prosecutor, Assam - Gauhati"]- ["Manjulabai Gulabrao Sonone VS Sau. Shalini Swapnil Sonone - Bombay"]- ["Virendra Kumar Kushwaha VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"]- ["Smt. Andekar Laxmibai vs The State of Telangana - Telangana"]
Domestic violence cases in India often raise complex procedural questions, especially regarding who can be named as parties. A common query arises: whether the prosecutor is arrayed as second respondent in a domestic violence case under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act). This blog post delves into the statutory definitions, judicial interpretations, and practical roles to provide clarity. While this is general information based on legal precedents, consult a qualified lawyer for case-specific advice.
The DV Act aims to protect women from violence in domestic settings by providing civil remedies like protection orders, residence rights, and monetary relief. Central to any proceeding is identifying the correct respondent—the person against whom relief is sought.
Section 2(q) of the DV Act explicitly defines a respondent as any adult male person who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person. Menakuru Renuka and Ors VS Menakuru Mohan Reddy - Crimes (2008)A. K. Srinivasa Rao VS State of A. P. , rep. , by its PP, High Court of A. P. - 2015 0 Supreme(AP) 23. This definition emphasizes an adult male in a domestic relationship, typically the husband or male partner.
A proviso extends this to relatives of the husband or male partner, but only in specific contexts, such as when they are alleged to have committed acts of domestic violence. Women are generally excluded unless they fit under related categories, but the focus remains on those in a domestic relationship. Menakuru Renuka and Ors VS Menakuru Mohan Reddy - Crimes (2008).
For instance, courts have clarified that mere visits to a shared household do not establish a domestic relationship sufficient to array someone as a respondent. Actual or past residence is required. Kinjal Jayesh Mehta VS Mrs. Disha Jimit Sanghvi - 2024 Supreme(Bom) 484. In one case, a sister-in-law residing separately was not considered a respondent due to lack of shared living. Kinjal Jayesh Mehta VS Mrs. Disha Jimit Sanghvi - 2024 Supreme(Bom) 484.
The prosecutor plays a distinct role in DV proceedings, which are quasi-civil but governed by CrPC procedures under Section 28 of the DV Act. Importantly, the prosecutor is not arrayed as a second respondent. Their function is to represent the state in criminal prosecution aspects, such as breaches of protection orders, not to be a party against whom relief is sought. Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi VS Vidhi Rawal - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 873.
The prosecutor's role is to conduct the prosecution on behalf of the state and is not a party to the proceedings as a respondent. Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi VS Vidhi Rawal - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 873. Prosecutors assist the court but are legal officers, not adversaries in the aggrieved person's complaint.
In criminal proceedings under the DV Act, respondents remain the alleged perpetrators—adult males or qualifying relatives—not state representatives like prosecutors. Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi VS Vidhi Rawal - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 873.
Case law consistently upholds that respondents are limited to those in domestic relationships who allegedly committed violence.
Relatives like in-laws may be arrayed if allegations specify their role, but only with evidence of domestic relationship. For example, parents-in-law challenged interim custody orders, but courts examined material on record rather than quashing outright. R. Thayalan VS Vidya - 2017 Supreme(Mad) 2793.
Broader precedents discuss shared households and respondents: The relatives of the husband who have treated the aggrieved person with domestic violence can be arrayed as respondent. The definition of respondent does not include only husband. Satish Chander Ahuja VS Sneha Ahuja - 2020 6 Supreme 613. However, none extend this to prosecutors.
To contextualize, let's examine typical respondents:
In multi-respondent cases, like D.V.C. No. 21 of 2018, petitioners (e.g., husbands) are first respondents, with in-laws as others—but no prosecutors. Lakshmi Narayanan VS Kamatchi - 2020 Supreme(Mad) 1137.
DV complaints often coexist with maintenance or divorce petitions, but filing them doesn't make prosecutors parties. Mere pendency of DV cases doesn't constitute cruelty in divorce proceedings. Satish Dhudku Halnor VS Yogita Satish Halnor - 2019 Supreme(Bom) 673.
Typically, no provision arrays prosecutors as respondents. However:- If a prosecutor personally commits domestic violence (highly unlikely and unaddressed in sources), they could theoretically be named, but standard roles preclude this.- Prosecutors may intervene in breaches of orders, but as state representatives, not respondents. Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi VS Vidhi Rawal - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 873.
Limitations like filing within one year (via CrPC applicability) apply to complaints against proper respondents. Lakshmi Narayanan VS Kamatchi - 2020 Supreme(Mad) 1137.
In settlements, like Lok Adalat resolutions alongside divorce, proceedings against proper respondents are quashed. KANNAN vs STATE REP BY - 2022 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 9375.
This analysis draws from statutory provisions and precedents like Menakuru Renuka and Ors VS Menakuru Mohan Reddy - Crimes (2008), A. K. Srinivasa Rao VS State of A. P. , rep. , by its PP, High Court of A. P. - 2015 0 Supreme(AP) 23, Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi VS Vidhi Rawal - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 873, and others. For personalized guidance, consult a legal expert, as outcomes depend on facts.
Disclaimer: This post provides general insights and is not legal advice.
#DVA ctIndia, #DomesticViolenceLaw, #LegalInsights
One of the important steps to be taken towards that direction is to scrutinize the applications meticulously and satisfy that a case of domestic violence as defined in the Act is made out against all the respondents and no one is arrayed as a party to the proceedings on omnibus and vague allegations, ... -wife or any female member alleging domestic violence. ... The statement of objects and reasons of the Act record that civil law does not address the phenomenon of domestic#H....
While so, after moving to her parents house, she had instituted the Domestic Violence Case. On the date of filing of the Domestic Violence Case four years had lapsed. Therefore, the Domestic Violence Case is not maintainable on the point of limitation. ... Therefore, in the case of a wife or a common law wife complaining of domestic violence, the husband’s relatives including mo....
domestic violence. ... On the face of the FIR, does not disclose any offence against the petitioners by establishing the prima facie case that they had continuously ill-treated the second respondent and caused domestic violence. ... It is needless to state that in matrimonial matters due to frictions and disaffection between the couples, the other members of the husband's family are also dragged in complaints given for domestic violence. ... have als....
Domestic Violence is a violence which is committed when parties are in domestic relationship, sharing same household. 35. ... The purpose of the Act is to give remedy to the aggrieved persons against domestic violence. The domestic violence can take place only when one is living in shared household with the respondents. ... Lahkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent No. 1 has argued in the same tune by stating t....
It is known law that while exercising the revisional jurisdiction in a case involved the concurring findings of two facts arrived by two Courts, the High Court cannot act as second appellate Court. In the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Bir Singh vs. ... Under Sec. 21, Compensation Under Sec. 22 and interim or ex parte order Under Sec. 23 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005." ... for all reliefs under Ss. 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of the Act and also interim relief under Sec. 23 of the Domestic ....
Even otherwise considering the pleadings in the applications read with the reliefs, there is no case of domestic violence made out qua the Petitioner. 28. Consequently, the Petition succeeds. ... The term 'domestic relationship' occupies prominence while construing whether the party is an aggrieved person and as to whether the other party can be arrayed as Respondent in D.V. Application. ... In view of the discussion above, in my view, there was no subsisting domestic relationship betw....
The respondent was subjected to domestic violence by non-applicant nos.1 to 7 and therefore she filed the case against them under the D.V. Act. 4. ... In order to proceed against the relatives on the basis of allegations and averments made in the application, the court must be satisfied that the case of domestic violence is made against the relatives. 12. ... The respondent has joined the petitioners in the domestic violence proceeding with the husba....
Prior to that, there had been dispute between the husband and wife based on which Domestic Violence Original Petition was filed. Pending Domestic Violence Original Petition, the matter was referred to Lok Adalat where the dispute was settled. ... quashed, in the light of the divorce decree granted by the Family Court, Chennai, by consent and in the light of the settlement of the Domestic Violence Act case before the Lok Adalat. ... Case on the groun....
under Section 5 of Domestic Violence Rules. ... Allegation of domestic violence has been levelled against respondents (applicants herein) in perfunctory manner without referring any particular incident of domestic violence attributing to any of them. ... No particular instance has been given attributing to the overt act of applicant nos. 4 and 5 to make out a case of domestic violence against them. In the complaint under Section 12 ....
Each and every case of domestic violence will thus depend on the peculiar facts obtaining in each case. 38. We have also noted that the appellants do not live with the principal accused. ... In fact, to deal with this pernicious phenomenon, stringent statutes like Protection from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, have been enacted with very expansive meaning and scope of what amounts to domestic violence. ... Thus, providing visible evidence by the victi....
It is submitted that S.R. Batra has not appreciated that second part of the definition of shared household is merely illustration and not exhaustive. The relatives of the husband who have treated the aggrieved person with domestic violence can be arrayed as respondent. The definition of respondent does not include only husband. There is no reason to extend definition of shared household only to property in which the husband has a share.
There are totally three Respondents in the Domestic Violence Case, in which the Petitioner is arrayed as First Respondent. 1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in D.V.C. No. 21 of 2018, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur.
Same is the case as regards her application under Domestic Violence Act. She has also filed litigation for maintenance to which she was entitled to, since the husband has not claimed that he had made provision for her maintenance. Therefore, mere filing of these proceedings ipso facto will not amount to "cruelty" as contemplated under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
It is also submitted that petitioner was never in domestic relationship with the complainant and her husband rather she is stranger to the family, only a colleague of the complainant’s husband. If any person being in domestic relationship commits domestic violence only in that case a proceeding under the Domestic Violence Act is maintainable otherwise not.
4. Challenging the said order, the father-in-law and mother-in-law who had arrayed as accused No.2 and 3 in the case under Domestic Violence Act, has preferred this Criminal Original Petition.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
