SC to examine whether domestic violence can be perpetrated by women

Wednesday, 9 December 2015 By Harleen Kaur Bar, Bench & Litigation

The Supreme Court will examine the validity, with the help of central and state governments, of a decision of the Bombay high court that the Protection of Women from the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 can be used by a mother in law to initiate action against her daughter in law, reported The Hindustan Times.

The Bombay high court had in September 2015 held that the daughter in law can be prosecuted under the act after which she petitioned in the Supreme Court before the bench led by Justice Ranjan Gogoi which took cognizance of the matter and asked the Central as well as the Maharashtra governments to respond about their stand on the issue.

The petitioner has claimed in the case that as per the act a mother, sister or mother in law can only prosecute men and not women.

The next date of hearing of the matter in the Supreme Court is 17 February 2016 when the Attorney General’s office will also assist the court.

domestic violenceRanjan GogoiSupreme CourtBombay high court

Comments

Saloni93 10 Dec 2015, 12:32
+0 -0
The Act clearly defines a respondent to mean men, and if married/relationship in the nature of marriage, the male partner's relatives. Where is this confusion coming from? Is the contest that relatives can't be women?
Truether 13 Dec 2015, 05:11
+0 -0
Whatever be the contest....read the preamble of the Social Engineering Act a.k.a D.V. Act....assuming you have read it, my question to you is can a minor daughter proceed under the d.V. act (social engineering act) against her mother???
Later read the meaning of violence in "convention of elimination of all forms of discrimination against women" to know how the interpretation of Social Engineering Act (d.V.act) has gone haywire....read with article 253 and entry 13 list 1 schedule 7 of our CONSTITUTION.
The link that was weak 14 Dec 2015, 02:34
+0 -0
The link alias URL to the Hindustan Times was probably too tenuous. Broken as it is, there obtains now a so-called 404 Error. There can be no other causative factor worse than the repeated and forceful traversals of the "link" by hordes of LI readers, all of the stronger gender I surmise. I request all readers, able fingered males and hefty matrons alike, to be more gentlemanly while invoking the sinister side of their electronic rodents.
Commenting is closed for this article.