Legislative Provisions relating to Domestic Violence in India

2.1 Introduction

Law always plays a vital role in establishing peace and harmony in the society. Husband and wife, being tied in a matrimonial bond, constitute a very essential element of the society. There are times when conflict arises even in this bond and in order to establish harmony and peace it becomes essential to take recourse of law. To meet those insurgencies our legislature has been authorized with the power and obligated with the duty to frame laws from time to time which are necessary to prevent the unpleasant dissolution of this matrimonial bond.

Society is dynamic in nature so our law has to be dynamic as well because law is an instrument of social change. As the society is changing, the kind conflicts within the family also undergoing change. People are getting more aggressive day by day and this has made the problem of violence within the four walls of the house very rampant in the society. The perpetrator and the victim of such violence, however, can be anyone regardless of the criterion of age, gender, literacy, locality etc.

Ultimate objective of every legal system is to arrive at truth, punish the guilty and protect the innocent. The investigating agencies and the courts start with the presumption that the accused persons are guilty and that the complainant is speaking the truth. The role of investigating agencies and the court is that of watch dog and not of bloodhound. It is generally accepted that criminality amongst women is more damaging to wider society that’s why women are less likely to be suspected of crime. When suspected they are less likely to be charged and prosecuted and finally if prosecuted our criminal justice system treats them lightly in matter of punishment.[1]

2.2 Legislative Provisions Relating to Domestic Violence in India

Under our Indian legal system, remedy against violence within the four walls of the house is provided under both civil as well as criminal law. In civil law, the law relating to the problem of domestic violence is dealt under The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. On the other hand, under the criminal law, relief against domestic violence is generally sought under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Both these remedies run concurrently and don’t bar the remedy available under other law.

2.2.1 Indian Penal Code, 1860 & Domestic Violence

Section 498A[2] of the Indian Penal Code was passed to protect women against marital cruelty and dowry harassment. This provision is intended to protect the wife from being subjected by the husband or his relatives to cruelty. Cruelty for the purpose of this Section means willful conduct that is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or cause grave injury or damage to life, limb or health, mental or physical. It also includes harassment by coercing to meet unlawful demands.

            It allows the arrest of the husband and his relatives solely on the basis of allegations made by the wife, without any evidence and investigation. Section 498A, being non-bailable, allows punishing the accused by, imprisonment even before the guilt is established. Unfortunately, it is increasingly being misused by women to settle scores with their in-laws and husband. Innocent families have been imprisoned only on the basis of the wife's allegations.

Section 498A of Indian Penal Code has become frustrated on the feminist standpoint also. Rapid use and heavy misuse of this section has also failed to fulfil the object of social welfare and gender justice. The random arrest of mother-in-law and sister-in-law in the name of cruelty under this section has proved that to protect one woman it has put in danger and made vulnerable two more women.[3]

Analyzing the constitutional validity of the sec 498 A of I.P.C. it can be viewed that the Section is ultra vires to Art.14 of constitution of India. The concept of equality and equal protection of law guaranteed by Art 14 in its proper spectrum encompasses social and economic justice in a political democracy. It is a pledge of protection or guarantee of equal rights within the territorial jurisdiction of the Union to the enjoyment of rights and privileges without favoritism or discrimination. If a wife has a law to protect herself against the cruelty of her husband, why doesn’t husband have it? When male goes with genuine complaint, the police can record a non cognizable offence against the women. Every 100 male suicides have 45 married males, and every 100 women suicide have 25 married women. Married women suicides have default arrests of the in-laws under presumed dowry death. Married men suicide entitle wife for a 50% share in the property.[4] What kind of equality is this? Equality is a dynamic concept which goes on changing with changing times and social contexts and must be understood in that sense. There is no prohibition clause in the Section 498A that would stop women to misuse it against the men.

Though it is the duty of the court to decide the case based on facts and circumstances but what amounts to cruelty is an important aspect as misuse of laws by the wife against husband in society is growing day by day and most apparently some Indian urban educated women have turned the tables and are using these laws as weapon to unleash personal vendetta on their husbands and innocent relatives and there are certain grounds on which cruelty against husband can be proved as a form of domestic violence against husband[5]:-

1.      Misuse of dowry laws, Domestic Violence Act and Section 498-A of IPC by wife against husband and in-laws of husband through lodging false complaints.

2.      Desertion by wife which means deliberately intending for separation and to bring cohabitation permanently to an end.

3.      Adultery by the wife means wife having sexual relationship with some other person during the lifetime of marriage and there must be strict law to punish wife who has committed adultery.

4.      Wife opting out for second marriage without applying for the divorce proceedings.

5.      Threatening to leave husband’s home and threat to commit suicide by the wife.

6.      Cruel behavior of wife where wife tearing the shirt of the husband, refusing to cook food properly or on time and breaking of the mangalsutra in the presence of husband’s relatives.

7.      Abusing and accusing husband by way of insulting in presence of in-laws and in some cases wife abusing husband in front of office staff members.

8.      Wife refusing to have sex with husband without any sufficient reasons which can be considered as a ground of cruelty and husband can file a divorce petition.

9.      Lowering reputation of the husband by using derogatory words in presence of family members and elders.

10.  Lodging FIR against husband and in-laws which has later proved as false report.

11.  Conduct and misbehavior of the wife against husband i.e. pressuring husband to leave his home, insisting for the separate residence, mentally torture and disrespectful behavior towards husband and in-laws as well.

12.  Some other grounds of cruelty i.e. mental disorder and unsoundness of wife, Impotency of wife, illicit relationship of wife with some other person and Wife suffering from the filarial.

13.  Extra-marital affairs of wife can also be a ground of cruelty against the husband.

14.  Initiating criminal proceedings against husband and in-laws of husband with mala-fide intention by the wife.

2.2.2 Malimath Committee Report, 2003 & Domestic Violence

Justice Dr. V.S. Malimath Committee’s report on ‘Reform of Criminal justice System’ suggested to bring the Section 498A of Indian penal Code under the purview of compoundable offence.[6] This shield has become only and multipurpose sword against husband and his relatives. According to Malimath Committee Report once a complaint or FIR is lodged under section 498A of Indian Penal Code, it becomes easy tool in the hands of the police to arrest or threaten to arrest the husband and other relatives named in FIR without even considering the intrinsic worth of allegations and making a preliminary investigation.[7]

As the committee explained, “In less tolerant impulsive woman may lodge an FIR even on a trivial act. The result is that the husband and his family may be immediately arrested and there may be a suspension or loss of job. The offence alleged being non-bailable, innocent persons languish in custody. There may be a claim for maintenance adding fuel to fire, if the husband cannot pay…..”[8]

2.2.3    The Law Commission of India Reports and Domestic Violence

The Supreme Court of India in the case of Ramgopal vs. State of M.P.[9] observed: “There are several offences under the IPC that are currently non compoundable. These include offences punishable under Section 498-A, Section 326, etc. of the IPC. Some of such offences can be made compoundable by introducing a suitable amendment in the statute. We are of the opinion that the Law Commission of India could examine whether a suitable proposal can be sent to the Union Government in this regard. Any such step would not only relieve the courts of the burden of deciding cases in which the aggrieved parties have themselves arrived at a settlement, but may also encourage the process of re-conciliation between them. The Court requested the Law Commission and the Government of India to examine all these aspects and take such steps as may be considered feasible”.

Again, the same learned Judges in an Order passed later in Diwaker Singh vs. State of Bihar[10]made similar observations which are extracted hereunder: “Further, we are of the opinion that Section 324 IPC and many other offences should be made compoundable. We have already referred to the Law Commission of India and the Ministry of Law & Justice, Government of India our suggestion that suitable amendments should be made in the Code of Criminal Procedure for making several offences which are presently treated as non-compoundable under Section 320 CrPC as compoundable. This will greatly reduce the burden of the courts. The Law Commission of India and the Ministry of Law & Justice, Government of India may also examine this suggestion. The Law Commission may also examine several other provisions of the Indian Penal Code and other statutes in order to recommend that they may also be made compoundable even if they are presently non-compoundable.”

Pursuant to these observations of the Supreme Court, the Law Commission of India embarked on the task of identifying appropriate offences which could be added to the list of compoundable offences under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C

2.2.4.1     237^th Law Commission Report, 2011

The law Commission of India recently in its 237th report on ‘compounding of IPC offences’ highly recommended that Section 498A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 should be made compoundable with the permission of the court.[11] This is not the first time; the same recommendation was made in its 154th report of 1996 and 177th report of 2001 respectively.

2.2.4.2             243^rd Law Commission Report, 2012

The Commission observed, “There is preponderance of opinion in favour of making the offence under S,498-A compoundable with the permission of the court. Even those (individuals, officials and organizations) who say that it should remain a non bailable offence, have suggested that the offence should be made compoundable, subject to the permission of court. Some States, for e.g., 17 Andhra Pradesh have already made it compoundable. The Supreme Court, in the case of Ramgopal v. State of M. P. in SLP (Crl.) No. 6494 of 2010 (Order dt. July 30, 2010), observed that the offence under S, 498-A should be made compoundable…..”[12]

The views of Malimath Committee as well as the recommendations in the 154th Report of Law commission were referred to with approval by the Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on  Home Affairs in its 111th Report on the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill 2003 (August 2005). The Standing Committee observed thus: “It is desirable to provide a chance to the estranged spouses to come together and therefore it is proposed to make the offence u/s 498A IPC, a compoundable one by inserting this Section in the Table under sub-section (2) of Section 320 of Cr.P.C”. The 128th Report of the said Standing Committee (2008) on the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Bill, 2006 reiterated the recommendation made in the 111th Report.[13]

If a woman misuses S, 498A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 she is committing following crimes:-

1.      Crimes against her husband and his family members.

2.      Crime against her children, who will suffer due to their separation and tension.

3.      Crime against the religious vows that she took during marriage.

4.      Crime against the sanctity of court.

5.      Crime against police and public administration who has supported her as a victimized women.

6.      Crime against society, social system and values.

7.      Crime against the womanhood which is in question due to her.

It means that misuse of S. 498A is an offence that should amount to seven times the punishment provided under this section.[14]

2.2.4 The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 is an Act of the Parliament of India enacted to protect women from domestic violence. It was brought into force by the Indian government on 26^th October 2006. The Act provides for the first time in Indian law a definition of domestic violence. This definition is broad and includes not only physical violence, but also other forms of violence such as emotional/verbal, sexual, and economic abuse. It is a civil law and is not enacted for penalizing any person.

Primarily meant to provide protection to the wife or female live-in partner from domestic violence at the hands of the husband or male live-in partner or his relatives, the law also extends its protection to women living in a household such as sisters, widows or mothers. Domestic violence under the act includes actual abuse or the threat of abuse whether physical, sexual, verbal, emotional or economic. Harassment by way of unlawful dowry demands to the woman or her relatives.

2.2.4.1 Salient Features of the Act:

The salient features of the Protection from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 are as follows:

• The Act seeks to cover those women who are or have been in a relationship with the abuser where both parties have lived together in a shared household and are related by consanguinity, marriage or a relationship in the nature of marriage, or adoption; in addition relationship with family members living together as a joint family are also included. Even those women who are sisters, widows, mothers, single women, or living with them are entitled to get legal protection under the proposed Act.
• Domestic violence includes actual abuse or the threat of abuse that is physical, sexual, verbal, emotional and economic. Harassment by way of unlawful dowry demands to the woman or her relatives are also be covered under this definition.
• One of the most important features of the Act is the woman’s right to secure housing. The Act provides for the woman’s right to reside in the matrimonial or shared household, whether or not she has any title or rights in the household. This right is secured by a residence order, which is passed by a court. These residence orders cannot be passed against anyone who is a woman.
• The other relief envisaged under the Act is that of the power of the court to pass protection orders that prevent the abuser from aiding or committing an act of domestic violence or any other specified act, entering a workplace or any other place frequented by the abused, attempting to communicate with the abused, isolating any assets used by both the parties and causing violence to the abused, her relatives and others who provide her assistance from the domestic violence.
• The draft Act provides for appointment of protection officers and NGOs to provide assistance to the woman, medical examination, legal aid, safe shelter, etc.
• The Act provides for breach of protection order or interim protection order by the respondent as a cognizable and non-bailable offence punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine which may extend to twenty thousand rupees or with both. Similarly, non-compliance or discharge of duties by the protection officer is also made an offence under the Act with similar punishment.

2.2.4.2 Application to the Magistrate[15]

An application regarding domestic violence can be presented to the magistrate seeking one or more reliefs mentioned in sections by:

• The aggrieved person,
• Protection officer on behalf of aggrieved person
• Any other person on behalf of aggrieved person

2.2.4.3 Jurisdiction of Court[16]

The First Class Magistrate or Metropolitan Magistrate are the competent court within the local limits of which

• The aggrieved person permanently or temporary resides or carries on business or is employed
• The respondent permanently or temporally resides or carries on business or is employed or
• The cause of action arises

2.2.4.4 Power to Issue Orders by Magistrate

2.2.4.4.1 Protection Orders[17]

After giving an opportunity to the aggrieved person and respondent of being heard and the magistrate is satisfied that a prima facie case of domestic violence has taken place or is likely to take place, pass a protection order in favour of the aggrieved person prohibiting the respondent from the following acts such as committing any acts of domestic violence

• Aiding or abetting in the act of domestic violence
• Entering the place of employment of aggrieved person or if the person is child, its school or any other places
• Attempting to communicate in any form including personal, oral or written, electronic or telephonic contact
• Alienating any assets, operating bank account, bank locker held or enjoyed by both parties jointly or singly by the respondent including her sthridhan
• Causing violence to the dependents, or other relative or any other person who give the assistance to the aggrieved person or
• Committing any other acts specified by the protection officer

2.2.4.4.2 Residence orders[18]

The magistrate being satisfied that a domestic violence has taken place, pass residence order-

• Restraining the respondent from dispossessing or in any manner disturbing the peaceful possession of the shared household
• Directing the respondent to remove himself from the shared household
• Restraining the respondent or his relatives from entering any portion of the shared house hold where the aggrieved person lives
• Restraining the respondent from alienating or disposing of the shared house hold or encumbering it
• Restraining the respondent from renouncing his right in the shared household
• Directing the respondent to secure same level of alternate accommodation for the aggrieved person as enjoyed by her or to pay rent for the same if the circumstances so require.

It is provided under the provisions of the Act that no order shall be made against women. Magistrate may impose additional condition and pass any other order to protect the safety of the aggrieved person or her child. Magistrate is also empowered to order direction to the concerned station house officer of the police station to give protection to the aggrieved person, to assist in implementing his order. Magistrate may also impose on the respondent to direct stridhan or any other property or valuable security she is entitled.

2.2.4.4.3 Monetary relief[19]

The magistrate may direct the respondent to pay monetary relief to meet the expenses of the aggrieved person and any child as a result of domestic violence and such relief include

• Loss of earnings
• Medical expenses
• Loss caused due to destruction or removal or damage of any property
• Pass order as to maintenance for the aggrieved person as well as her children if any including the order under or in addition to an order of maintenance under section 125 criminal procedure code or any other law.

The quantum of relief shall be fair, reasonable and consistent with the standard of living to which the aggrieved person is accustomed to. Magistrate can order a lump sum amount also. On failure of the respondent to make payment of this order, magistrate shall order employer or debtor of the respondent to directly pay to the aggrieved person or to deposit in the court a portion of the salary or wage due to the respondent. Magistrate can order a lump sum amount also. On failure of the respondent to make payment of this order, magistrate shall order employer or debtor of the respondent to directly pay to the aggrieved person or to deposit in the court a portion of the salary or wage due to the respondent.

2.2.4.4.4 Custody orders[20]

Magistrate can grant temporary custody of any child or children to the aggrieved person or to the person making application on her behalf and specify the arrangements for visit of such child by the respondent. Magistrate can refuse the visit of such respondent in such case if it may harmful to the interest of the child.

2.2.4.4.5 Compensation orders[21]

Magistrate may pass order directing the respondent to pay compensation to the petitioner for injuries including mental torture and emotional distress caused by the acts of domestic violence committed by the respondent.

Copies of orders passed by the magistrate shall be supplied free of cost to the parties concerned and police officer and service provider

Any relief available under this Act may also be sought in any other legal proceedings before a civil court, family court or criminal court and such relief may be sought in addition to and along with relief sought for in suit, or legal proceeding before civil or criminal court.

2.2.4.5 Critical Appraisal of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

The Domestic Violence Act, through its various provisions, not only violates the Constitution of India but also the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other International Conventions. The Domestic Violence Act is based on the untenable assumption that victims of domestic violence are always women and that the perpetrator is always a man. However,  the statistics of NCRB show that in the years 2005 and 2006 alone, nearly twice as many married men as compared to married women committed suicide unable to withstand verbal, emotional, economic and physical abuse and legal harassment.[22]. The Domestic Violence Act, however, blatantly denies protection to men against any form of domestic abuse. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaims the principle of presumption of innocence. However, the Domestic Violence Act presumes that the accused man is guilty until proven innocent, thus violating the presumption of innocence and principle of fair trial guaranteed under Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

On the face of it, the law appears to be a blessing for people in abusive or violent relationships. However, a careful analysis reveals that, under the ploy of the women and children welfare, this law is yet another misguided attempt to enact legislation to grant women legal supremacy over men and to create a society where men are deprived of their rights.

There are three fundamental problems with this law:

a) it is overwhelmingly gender biased in favor of women,

b) the potential for misuse is astounding and

c) the definition of domestic violence is too elaborative.

The Domestic Violence Act singles out men as perpetrators of domestic violence[23] and assumes that only women are victims[24]. As per this law, only a woman can file a complaint against her male partner[25]. A man, who is a victim of domestic violence, has no rights under this law.

The fact is that it has been comprehensively proven in numerous studies that women are no less abusive as men in intimate relationships. Giving such sweeping legal powers to women, while withholding protection to male victims, is tantamount to systematic legal victimization of men. In the western world, the domestic violence laws are gender neutral and provide protection to the victims, both men and women. The fact that the Indian version explicitly prohibits any male victim to seek relief under this law defies all logic and is beyond comprehension.

The second significant flaw in this law is that it lends itself to such easy misuse that women find it hard to resist the temptation to teach a lesson to their male relatives and file frivolous and false cases.

The misuse is inherent in the provisions of the Act. As per the Act:

a) If woman demands any amount of money from husband, for any reason whatsoever, he is legally bound to pay that amount in full, failing which he can be imprisoned. Under the pretext of preventing economic abuse of women, this law legalizes the extortion of money by women. Interestingly, if he asks for money from her, he can be jailed for that as well. Furthermore, he is responsible for paying the rent if the couple resides in a shared rented accommodation[26].

b) As per the law, woman retains the right to the residence. This is a very convenient means of getting control of the house regardless of whether she has any legal right in the property.[27] Moreover, if man is booked under Domestic Violence, he is responsible for paying the rent as well, even though he may not be allowed to live in the house or he might even be in jail.

c) Husband can be booked under the Domestic Violence Act if the wife feels that she has been insulted. Insult is a relative term, which is totally left to her discretion. Interestingly, if she insults and abuses him verbally or even physically, he does not have any legal recourse in this law.[28]

d) Further under this Act, different reliefs in the form of protection orders[29], residence orders[30], monetary reliefs[31], custody orders[32] and compensatory orders[33], are only available to women only being in domestic relationship and that too explicitly as penalty upon the husband.

Thus in all these cases the women can exploit men in a legally permitted manner. The fact that the complaint by a woman is treated, prima facie, as true and genuine opens up another whole new realm of possibilities where innocent men are accused and implicated in false cases, just because they refuse to give in to her unreasonable demands.

The third major flaw in this law is that it provides an all-encompassing definition of domestic violence[34] and some terms (insults, name calling) are extremely subjective. The radical feminists claim that 70% of women in India face domestic violence which comes as no surprise as even an insult is considered domestic violence. Interestingly, they are mum on how many Indian men suffer domestic violence using the same criteria.

There are degrees of domestic violence and not all conflicts in a relationship can be termed as domestic violence. This law trivializes the issue of domestic violence by including minor differences in its realm and by explicitly denying protection to half of the population. The law in its current form is grossly inadequate to tackle the problem of domestic violence. It imposes a lot of responsibility on men, without giving them rights.

The worst part of the legal provision is to be found in the provision of the Act which provides that on the sole testimony of the aggrieved person, the wife, for example the Court may conclude that the offence has been committed by the accused[35]. This provision is against the principles of natural justice. The Act is totally biased in favour of females and against males. Law is irrationally presuming here that females always speak true and males always lie. This is an example of sex-biased law.

Allowing the respondent to be convicted on sole testimony by the complainant for non-compliance of protection orders passed, under Section 31[36] of the Act of 2005 is directly violative of Article 14[37] of the Constitution of India which says that there should be equality before law and equal protection of the laws. Moreover, the Act also allows multiple maintenance litigations to be admitted, under section 20[38] and 22[39], heard and maintenance be granted in tandem with maintenance provisions under Section 24[40], Hindu Marriage Act,1955 and Section 125[41] of Cr.P.C. This is direct violation of Article 20, clause 2[42], which provides for no double jeopardy i.e. only once a trial and punishment for one offence. With such unconstitutional provisions, it is highly optimistic to assume that this Act can bring down domestic violence against husbands.

The provisions of Indian Penal Code, Code of Criminal Procedure and Domestic Violence Act 2005 become handy weapons for those who want to settle any scores with the husband and in-laws. It has become an easy reckoner for the wife to dictate her own terms to the husband and the in–laws even if mentally and physically she remains elsewhere.[43]

It is very easy to misuse the provisions of the Act and gain an unfair advantage over the adversary. Such tendencies will ultimately turn out to be counter-productive.

The Act of 2005 is totally one sided. The basis of any criminal jurisprudence around the world is -“innocent until proven guilty” and in the words of English Jurist William Blackstone “it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer”. This Act overturns both these principles. As soon as a woman makes a statement of alleged domestic violence, the husband is treated as a criminal and is tried as a criminal. The basic problem encountered by men is that the police will not register case against their wives. There is no law whereby men can safeguard their rights who are the victims of the misuse of this Act. Men who complain about physical or verbal violence inflicted by their wives are generally portrayed as cartoons. It is needed to be understood that a huge number of men in the country has been caught in the web of false cases registered by their wives under various laws. 

The law considers no provision for husband and his relatives to prove other reason of marital dispute for the innocence and for complaining against wife and her family members. No right is given to husband and his family members and in-laws to file complaint of torture, abuse, blackmailing and harassment against wife. The Indian laws are doing great injustice to humanity by not penalizing the real criminals for the marital disputes. So far, the laws have been sympathizing with women in cases of marital disputes. The laws and Courts are incapable to handle a situation where a wife is accused of victimizing husband, but are more than ready to provide maximum relief to wife. In such a situation the husband is bound to undergo all the abuse, blackmailing, wrong charges, mental cruelty and punishment ordered by the courts.

---

[1] Gagandeep kaur, “Crulety against Men-Legal Vacuum, Pbi. ULJ, Vol:4, p.169 (2010)

[2]  Supra note 2 

[3] Partha Pratim Mitra, “A new look on matrimonial cruelty within criminal law”, Indian Bar Review, Vol. XL (1) 2013.

[4] Supra note 38 at p 127

[5] Dhawesh Pahuja, “Cruelty against husband in India” www.legalindia.in/cruelty-against-huband , visited on 10th November 2016.

[6] Dr Partha Partim Mitra, “ A new look on matrimonial cruelty with criminal law”, Indian Bar Review, Vol XL(1) 2013,  p.87

[7] 237th Law Commission Report 

[8]  “Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice System”, Vol. 1 , Chapter IV, pp 1-306, p- 191, para 16.4.4 Available at:http://www.mha.nic.in/hindi/sites/upload_files/mhahindi/files/pdf/criminal_justice_system.pdf, retrieved on 11-12-2016

[9] 2010 (7) SCALE 711

[10] Crl. appeal No. 433 of 2004 Dated 18th August 2010

[11] Published in December 2011 

[12]  Section 498A IPC Report No.243, para 8.1, pp 1-85 , p 16-17 August 2012 Available at http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/report243.pdf, retrieved on 11-12-2016

[13] 237^th Law Commission report, page 21-22

[14] Nishant Kumar, Misuse of Anti-Dowry Laws to Blackmail Husband, Independent Media Centre India, (2006), p. 6.

[15] Section12. Application to Magistrate.-(1) An aggrieved person or a Protection Officer or any other person on behalf of the aggrieved person may present an application to the Magistrate seeking one or more reliefs under this Act

[16] Section 27. Jurisdiction.—(1) The court of Judicial Magistrate of the first class or the Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be, within the local limits of which—(a) the person aggrieved permanently or temporarily resides or carries on business or is employed; or  (b) the respondent resides or carries on business or is employed; or (c) the cause of action has arisen,shall be the competent court to grant a protection order and other orders under this Act and to try offences under this Act.

[17] Section 18. Protection orders.-The Magistrate may, after giving the aggrieved person and the respondent an opportunity of  being heard and on being prima facie satisfied that domestic violence has taken place or is likely to take place, pass a protection order in favor of the aggrieved person and prohibit the respondent from-  (a) committing any act of domestic violence;  (b) aiding or abetting in the commission of acts of domestic violence;  (c) entering the place of employment of the aggrieved person or, if the person aggrieved is a child, its school or any other place frequented by the aggrieved person; (d) attempting to communicate in any form, whatsoever, with the aggrieved person, including personal, oral or written or electronic or telephonic contact; (e) alienating any assets, operating bank lockers or bank accounts used or held or enjoyed by both the parties, jointly by the aggrieved person and the respondent or singly by the respondent, including her stridhan or any other property held either jointly by the parties or separately by them without the leave of the Magistrate; (f) causing violence to the dependants, other relatives or any person who give the aggrieved person assistance from domestic violence;  (g) committing any other act as specified in the protection order. 

[18] Section19. Residence orders.-(1) While disposing of an application under sub-section (1) of section 12, the Magistrate may, on being satisfied that domestic violence has taken place, pass a residence order -

 (a) restraining the respondent from dispossessing or in any other manner disturbing the possession of the aggrieved person from the shared household, whether or not the respondent has a legal or equitable interest in the shared household;  (b) directing the respondent to remove himself from the shared household; (c) restraining the respondent or any of his relatives from entering any portion of the shared household in which the aggrieved person resides;(d) restraining the respondent from alienating or disposing off the shared household or encumbering the same;  (e) restraining the respondent from renouncing his rights in the shared household except with the leave of the Magistrate; or (f) directing the respondent to secure same level of alternate accommodation for the aggrieved person as enjoyed by her in the shared household or to pay rent for the same, if the circumstances so require:

[19] Section 20. Monetary reliefs.-(1) While disposing of an application under sub-section (1) of section 12, the Magistrate may direct the respondent to pay monetary relief to meet the expenses incurred and losses suffered by the aggrieved person and any child of the aggrieved person as a result of the domestic violence and such relief may include, but  not limited to,-  (a) the loss of earnings;  (b) the medical expenses; (c) the loss caused due to the destruction, damage or removal of any property from the control of the aggrieved person; and (d) the maintenance for the aggrieved person as well as her children, if any, including an order under or in addition to an order of maintenance under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or any other law for the time being in force.

[20] Section 21. Custody orders.-Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the Magistrate may, at any stage of hearing of the application for protection order or for any other relief under this Act grant temporary custody of any child or children to the aggrieved person or the person making an application on her behalf and specify, if necessary, the arrangements for visit of such child or children by the respondent:

[21] Section 22. Compensation orders.-In addition to other reliefs as may be granted under this Act, the Magistrate may on an application being made by the aggrieved person, pass an order directing the respondent to pay compensation and damages for the injuries, including mental torture and emotional distress, caused by the acts of domestic violence committed by that respondent. 

[22] Nitu Nawal & R.K.Sharma, “Domestic Violence Against Women”, Regal Publications, p 370

[23] Section 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:

[24]Section 2(a) "aggrieved person" means 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;

[25] Supra note 52

[26] Section 3 (iv) "economic abuse" includes- (a) deprivation of all or any economic or financial resources to which the aggrieved person is entitled under any law or custom whether payable under an order of a court or otherwise or which the aggrieved person requires out of necessity including, but not limited to, household necessities for the aggrieved person and her children, if any, stridhan, property, jointly or separately owned by the aggrieved person, payment of rental related to the shared household and maintenance;

[27] Section 17. Right to reside in a shared household.-(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, every woman in a domestic relationship shall have the right to reside in the shared household, whether or not she has any right, title or beneficial interest in the same.

[28] Section 3(iii) "verbal and emotional abuse" includes-

 (a) insults, ridicule, humiliation, name calling and insults or ridicule specially with regard to not having a child or a male child; and

 (b) repeated threats to cause physical pain to any person in whom the aggrieved person is interested.

[29] Supra note 54

[30] Supra note 55

[31] Supra note 56

[32] Supra note 57

[33] Supra note 58

[34] Supra note 15

[35] Section 32: Cognizance and proof.-(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), the offence under sub-section (1) of section 31 shall be cognizable and non-bailable. (2) Upon the sole testimony of the aggrieved person, the court may conclude that an offence under sub-section (1) of section 31 has been committed by the accused.

[36] Section 31 in The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Penalty for breach of protection order by respondent.—(1) A breach of protection order, or of an interim protection order, by the respondent shall be an offence under this Act and shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to twenty thousand rupees, or with both.(2) The offence under sub-section (1) shall as far as practicable be tried by the Magistrate who had passed the order, the breach of which has been alleged to have been caused by the accused.(3) While framing charges under sub-section (1), the Magistrates may also frame charges under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) or any other provision of that Code or the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961), as the case may be, if the facts disclose the commission of an offence under those provisions.

[37] Article 14 in The Constitution Of India 1949 Equality before law The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth

[38] Supra note 54

[39] Supra note 56

[40] Section 24 in The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings. —Where in any proceeding under this Act it appears to the court that either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, has no independent income sufficient for her or his support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding, it may, on the application of the wife or the husband, order the respondent to pay to the petitioner the expenses of the proceeding, and monthly during the proceeding such sum as, having regard to the petitioner's own income and the income of the respondent, it may seem to the court to be reasonable

[41] 125. Order for maintenance of wives, children and parents.(1) If any person leaving sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain-(a) his wife, unable to maintain herself, or(b) his legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself, or(c) his legitimate or illegitimate child (not being a married daughter) who has attained majority, where such child is, by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury unable to maintain itself, or(d) his father or mother, unable to maintain himself or herself,A Magistrate of’ the first class may, upon proof of such neglect or refusal, order such person to make a monthly allowance for the maintenance of his wife or such child, father or mother, at such monthly rate¹[***] as such magistrate thinks fit, and to pay the same to such person as the Magistrate may from time to time direct:

[42] Article 20(2) in The Constitution of India 1949 (2) No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once

[43] V.K Dewan, Law relating to Cruelty and Offences against Husbands, (2009), p. 4